Pharmacotherapeutic group: antineoplastic agents, other antineoplastic agents, ATC code: L01XK04
Mechanism of action
Talazoparib is an inhibitor of PARP enzymes, PARP1 (IC50=0.7 nM), and PARP2 (IC50=0.3 nM). PARP enzymes are involved in cellular DNA damage response signalling pathways such as DNA repair, gene transcription, and cell death. PARP inhibitors (PARPi) exert cytotoxic effects on cancer cells by 2 mechanisms, inhibition of PARP catalytic activity and by PARP trapping, whereby PARP protein bound to a PARPi does not readily dissociate from a DNA lesion, thus preventing DNA repair, replication, and transcription, thereby resulting in apoptosis and/or cell death. Treatment of cancer cell lines that are harbouring defects in DNA repair genes with talazoparib single agent leads to increased levels of γH2AX, a marker of double stranded DNA breaks, and results in decreased cell proliferation and increased apoptosis. Talazoparib anti-tumour activity was also observed in a patient-derived xenograft (PDX) BRCA mutant breast cancer model where the patient was previously treated with a platinum-based regimen, as well as in an androgen receptor (AR)-positive prostate cancer xenograft model. In these PDX models talazoparib decreased tumour growth and increased γH2AX level and apoptosis in the tumours.
The anti-tumour effects of combined inhibition of PARP and AR activity is based on the following mechanisms: AR signalling inhibition suppresses the expression of homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes including BRCA1, resulting in sensitivity to PARP inhibition. PARP1 activity has been shown to be required for maximal AR function and thus inhibiting PARP may reduce AR signalling and increase sensitivity to AR signalling inhibitors. Clinical resistance to AR blockade is sometimes associated with co-deletion of RB1 and BRCA2, which is in turn associated with sensitivity to PARP inhibition.
Cardiac electrophysiology
The effect of talazoparib on cardiac repolarisation was evaluated using time-matched electrocardiograms (ECGs) in assessing the relationship between the change of the QT interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) from baseline and the corresponding plasma talazoparib concentrations in 37 patients with advanced solid tumours. Talazoparib did not have a clinically relevant effect on QTc prolongation at the maximum clinically recommended monotherapy dose of 1 mg once daily.
Clinical efficacy and safety
Germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm) HER2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer
EMBRACA study
EMBRACA was an open-label, randomised, parallel, 2-arm multicentre study of Talzenna versus chemotherapy (capecitabine, eribulin, gemcitabine, vinorelbine) in patients with germline BRCA-mutated HER2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who received no more than 3 prior cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens for their metastatic or locally advanced disease. Patients were required to have received treatment with an anthracycline and/or a taxane (unless contraindicated) in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant and/or metastatic setting. Patients with prior platinum therapy for advanced disease were required to have no evidence of disease progression during platinum therapy. No prior treatment with a PARPi was permitted.
Of the 431 patients randomised in the EMBRACA study, 408 (95%) were centrally confirmed to have a deleterious or suspected deleterious gBRCAm using a clinical study assay; out of which 354 (82%) were confirmed using the BRACAnalysis CDx. BRCA mutation status (breast cancer susceptibility gene 1 [BRCA1] positive or breast cancer susceptibility gene 2 [BRCA2] positive) was similar across both treatment arms.
A total of 431 patients were randomised 2:1 to receive Talzenna 1 mg capsules once daily or chemotherapy at standard doses until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Of the 431 patients randomised onto EMBRACA, 287 were randomised to the Talzenna arm and 144 to the chemotherapy arm. Randomisation was stratified by prior use of chemotherapy for metastatic disease (0 versus 1, 2, or 3), by triple-negative disease status (triple-negative breast cancer [TNBC] versus non-TNBC), and history of central nervous system metastasis (yes versus no).
Patient demographic, baseline, and disease characteristics were generally similar between the study treatment arms (see Table 5).
| Table 5. Demographic, baseline, and disease characteristics—EMBRACA study |
| | Talazoparib (N=287) | Chemotherapy (N=144) |
| Median age (y [range]) | 45.0 (27.0, 84.0) | 50.0 (24.0, 88.0) |
| Age category (y), n (%) |
| < 50 | 182 (63.4%) | 67 (46.5%) |
| 50 to < 65 | 78 (27.2%) | 67 (46.5%) |
| ≥ 65 | 27 (9.4%) | 10 (6.9%) |
| Gender, n (%) |
| Female | 283 (98.6%) | 141 (97.9%) |
| Male | 4 (1.4%) | 3 (2.1%) |
| Race, n (%) |
| Asian | 31 (10.8%) | 16 (11.1%) |
| Black or African American | 12 (4.2%) | 1 (0.7%) |
| White | 192 (66.9%) | 108 (75.0%) |
| Other | 5 (1.7%) | 1 (0.7%) |
| Not reported | 47 (16.4%) | 18 (12.5%) |
| ECOG performance status, n (%) |
| 0 | 153 (53.3%) | 84 (58.3%) |
| 1 | 127 (44.3%) | 57 (39.6%) |
| 2 | 6 (2.1%) | 2 (1.4%) |
| Missing | 1 (0.3%) | 1 (0.7%) |
| Hormone receptor status, n (%) |
| HER2-positive | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) |
| Triple-negative | 130 (45.3%) | 60 (41.7%) |
| Hormone receptor-positive (ER positive or PgR positive) | 157 (54.7%) | 84 (58.3%) |
| BRCA status by central or local laboratory assessment, n (%) | 287 (100.0%) | 144 (100.0%) |
| BRCA1-mutation positive | 133 (46.3%) | 63 (43.8%) |
| BRCA2-mutation positive | 154 (53.7%) | 81 (56.3%) |
| Time from initial diagnosis of breast cancer to diagnosis of advanced breast cancer (years) |
| n | 286 | 144 |
| Median | 1.9 | 2.7 |
| Minimum, maximum | 0, 22 | 0, 24 |
| Categories for time from initial diagnosis of breast cancer to diagnosis of advanced breast cancer |
| < 12 months | 108 (37.6%) | 42 (29.2%) |
| ≥ 12 months | 178 (62.0%) | 102 (70.8%) |
| Number of prior cytotoxic regimens for locally advanced or metastatic disease |
| Mean (Std Dev) | 0.9 (1.01) | 0.9 (0.89) |
| Median | 1 | 1 |
| Minimum, maximum | 0, 4 | 0, 3 |
| Number of patients who received prior cytotoxic regimens for locally advanced or metastatic disease, n (%) |
| 0 | 111 (38.7%) | 54 (37.5%) |
| 1 | 107 (37.3%) | 54 (37.5%) |
| 2 | 57 (19.9%) | 28 (19.4%) |
| 3 | 11 (3.8%) | 8 (5.6%) |
| ≥ 4 | 1 (0.3%) | 0 (0.0%) |
| Number of patients who received following prior therapies, n (%) |
| Taxane | 262 (91.3%) | 130 (90.3%) |
| Anthracycline | 243 (84.7%) | 115 (79.9%) |
| Platinum | 46 (16.0%) | 30 (20.8%) |
Abbreviations: BRCA=breast cancer susceptibility gene; ER=estrogen receptor; HER2=human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; N=number of patients; n=number of patients in category; PgR=progesterone receptor.
The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, as assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR). The secondary objectives were objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), safety, and PK.
The study demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in PFS, the primary efficacy outcome, for Talzenna compared with chemotherapy. There was no statistically significant effect on OS at the time of final OS analysis. Efficacy data for EMBRACA are summarised in Table 6. The Kaplan-Meier curves for PFS and OS are displayed in Figure 1 and Figure 3, respectively.
| Table 6. Summary of efficacy results—EMBRACA study* |
| | Talazoparib | Chemotherapy |
| PFS by BICR | N=287 | N=144 |
| Events, number (%) | 186 (65%) | 83 (58%) |
| Median (95% CI), months | 8.6 (7.2, 9.3) | 5.6 (4.2, 6.7) |
| Hazard ratioa (95% CI) | 0.54 (0.41, 0.71) |
| 2-sided p-valueb | p<0.0001 |
| OS (final analysis)c | N=287 | N=144 |
| Events, number (%) | 216 (75.3%) | 108 (75%) |
| Median (95% CI), months | 19.3 (16.6, 22.5) | 19.5 (17.4, 22.4) |
| Hazard ratioa (95% CI) | 0.85 (0.67, 1.07)c |
| 2-sided p-valueb | p=0.1693 |
| Objective response by investigatord,e | N=219 | N=114 |
| ORR, % (95% CI) | 62.6 (55.8, 69.0) | 27.2 (19.3, 36.3) |
| Odds ratio (95% CI) | 4.99 (2.93, 8.83) |
| 2-sided p-valuef | p<0.0001 |
| Duration of response by investigatord | N=137 | N=31 |
| Median (IQR), months | 5.4 (2.8, 11.2) | 3.1 (2.4, 6.7) |
| Abbreviations: BICR=blinded independent central review; CI=confidence interval; CMH=Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel; CR=complete response; IQR=interquartile range; ITT=intent-to-treat; N=number of patients; ORR=objective response rate; OS=overall survival; PARP=poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase; PFS=progression-free survival; PR=partial response; RECIST 1.1=Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. * PFS, ORR and Duration of response are based on the data cutoff date of 15 September 2017 and a median follow-up for PFS of 13.0 months (95% CI: 11.1, 18.4) in the talazoparib arm and 7.2 months (95% CI: 4.6, 11.1) in the chemotherapy arm. OS is based on the data cutoff date 30 September 2019 and a median follow-up of 44.9 months (95% CI: 37.9, 47.0) in the talazoparib arm and 36.8 months (95% CI: 34.3, 43.0) in the chemotherapy arm. a. Hazard ratio was based on stratified Cox regression model with treatment as the only covariate (stratification factors: number of prior cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens, triple-negative status, history of central nervous system metastasis) and was relative to overall chemotherapy with < 1 favouring talazoparib. b. Stratified log-rank test. c. At the time of the final OS analysis, 46.3% versus 41.7% of patients randomised in the talazoparib and chemotherapy arms, respectively, received subsequently a platinum therapy, and 4.5% versus 32.6% received subsequently a PARP inhibitor treatment. d. Conducted in ITT with measurable disease population who had an objective response. The complete response rate was 5.5% for talazoparib compared to 0% for the chemotherapy arm. e. Per RECIST 1.1, confirmation of CR/PR was not required. f. Stratified CMH test. |
Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier curves of PFS—EMBRACA study
Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; PFS=progression-free survival.
A series of prespecified subgroup PFS analyses was performed based on prognostic factors and baseline characteristics to investigate the internal consistency of treatment effect. Consistent with the overall results, a reduction in the risk of disease progression or death in favour of the talazoparib arm was observed in all individual patient subgroups (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Forest plot of PFS analyses for key subgroups—EMBRACA study
Abbreviations: aBC=advanced breast cancer; CI=confidence interval; CNS=central nervous system; HR+=hormone receptor-positive; ITT=intent-to-treat; PCT=physician's choice treatment (chemotherapy); PFS=progression-free survival; TNBC=triple-negative breast cancer.
Figure 3. Kaplan-Meier curves of overall survival—EMBRACA study
Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; OS=overall survival.
Primary analysis' p-value was based on a stratified log-rank test.
Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)
TALAPRO-2 study
TALAPRO-2 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in which patients (N=805) with mCRPC were randomised 1:1 to receive Talzenna 0.5 mg once daily in combination with enzalutamide 160 mg once daily, versus a comparator arm of placebo in combination with enzalutamide 160 mg once daily. All patients received a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analog or had prior bilateral orchiectomy and needed to have progressed on prior androgen deprivation therapy. Prior treatment with abiraterone or taxane-based chemotherapy for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) was permitted.
Randomisation was stratified by (1) previous treatment with abiraterone or taxane-based chemotherapy versus no such prior treatment; and by (2) HRR gene mutation status which was prospectively tested by next generation sequencing of tumour tissue using FoundationOne CDx or circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) using FoundationOne Liquid CDx; patients with tumour HRR gene mutations (ATM, ATR, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDK12, CHEK2, FANCA, MLH1, MRE11A, NBN, PALB2, or RAD51C) versus patients without tumour HRR gene mutations or with unknown status.
The median age was 71 years (range 36 to 91) in both arms; 62% were White, 31% were Asian, and 2% were Black. Most patients (66%) in both arms had an ECOG performance status of 0. In patients treated with Talzenna, the proportion of patients with RECIST 1.1 measurable disease at baseline per BICR was 30%. Twenty-eight percent (28%) of patients had received prior abiraterone or taxane-based chemotherapy. Twenty percent (20%) had tumours with HRR gene mutations and 80% had tumours that did not have HRR gene mutations or had an unknown status.
The primary efficacy outcome was radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) evaluated according to RECIST version 1.1 and Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group Criteria 3 (PCWG3) (bone) criteria, as assessed by BICR. OS was an alpha-controlled secondary endpoint.
A statistically significant improvement in BICR-assessed rPFS and OS was demonstrated for Talzenna in combination with enzalutamide compared to placebo in combination with enzalutamide. A sensitivity analysis of investigator-assessed rPFS was consistent with the BICR-assessed rPFS results.
Efficacy results of TALAPRO-2 are provided in Tables 7 and 8, and Figures 4, 5, 6 and 7.
| Table 7. Summary of efficacy results—TALAPRO-2 (mCRPC)* |
| | Talazoparib + enzalutamide N=402 | Placebo + enzalutamide N=403 |
| rPFS by BICR |
| Events, number (%) | 151 (37.6) | 191 (47.4) |
| Median months (95% CI) | NR (27.5, NR) | 21.9 (16.6, 25.1) |
| Hazard ratio (95% CI)a p-valueb | 0.627 (0.506, 0.777) p<0.0001 |
| OS |
| Events, number (%) | 211 (52.5) | 243 (60.3) |
| Median months (95% CI) | 45.8 (39.4, 50.8) | 37 (34.1, 40.4) |
| Hazard ratio (95% CI)a p-valueb | 0.796 (0.661, 0.958) p=0.0155 |
| Abbreviations: BICR=blinded independent central review; CI=confidence interval; CSPC=castration-sensitive prostate cancer; HRR=homologous recombination repair; mCRPC=metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; N=number of patients; NHT=novel hormone therapy; NR=not reached; OS=overall survival; rPFS=radiographic progression-free survival. * rPFS is based on the data cutoff date of 16 August 2022 and a median follow-up for rPFS of 24.9 months (95% CI: 24.7, 25.3) in the talazoparib plus enzalutamide arm and 24.6 months (95% CI: 22.1, 24.9) in the placebo plus enzalutamide arm. OS is based on the data cutoff date of 3 September 2024 and a median follow-up for OS of 52.5 months (95% CI: 49.9, 53.4) in the talazoparib plus enzalutamide arm and 53.0 months (95% CI: 50.6, 54.0) in the placebo plus enzalutamide arm. a Hazard ratio based on Cox proportional hazards model stratified by previous treatment with NHT (abiraterone) or taxane-based chemotherapy for CSPC (yes versus no) and by HRR mutational status (deficient versus non-deficient/unknown) with < 1 favouring talazoparib. b. P-values (2-sided) from the log-rank test stratified by previous treatment with NHT (abiraterone) or taxane-based chemotherapy for CSPC and by HRR mutational status. |
At the time of the final OS analysis, median rPFS was 33.1 months (95% CI: 27.4, 39.0) for patients who received Talzenna in combination with enzalutamide and 19.5 months (95% CI: 16.6, 24.7) for patients who received placebo in combination with enzalutamide (hazard ratio=0.667, 95% CI: 0.551, 0.807).
| Table 8. Summary of efficacy results for subgroup analysis – TALAPRO-2 (mCRPC)* |
| | Talazoparib + enzalutamide | Placebo + enzalutamide |
| HRRm Subgroup Analysesa |
| HRRm | N=85 | N=82 |
| rPFS by BICR | | |
| Events, number (%) | 37 (43.5) | 49 (59.7) |
| Median months (95% CI) | 27.9 (16.8, NR) | 13.8 (10.9, 19.5) |
| Hazard ratio (95% CI)b | 0.424 (0.275, 0.653) |
| OS | | |
| Events, number (%) | 41 (48.2) | 55 (67.1) |
| Median months (95% CI) | 45.8 (36.4, NR) | 30.1 (25.6, 38.2) |
| Hazard ratio (95% CI)b | 0.524 (0.348, 0.787) |
| Non-HRRm | N=207 | N=219 |
| rPFS by BICR | | |
| Events, number (%) | 73 (35.3) | 95 (43.4) |
| Median months (95% CI) | NR (25.8, NR) | 22.4 (16.6, NR) |
| Hazard ratio (95% CI)b | 0.695 (0.511, 0.944) |
| OS | |
| Events, number (%) | 112 (54.1) | 133 (60.7) |
| Median months (95% CI) | 45 (34.7, 53.3) | 37.4 (31.8, 41.4) |
| Hazard ratio (95% CI)b | 0.817 (0.635, 1.053) |
| BRCAm Subgroup Analysesa |
| BRCAm | N=27 | N=32 |
| rPFS by BICR | | |
| Events, number (%) | 8 (29.6) | 22 (68.7) |
| Median months (95% CI) | NR (16.8, NR) | 11 (7.4, 24.6) |
| Hazard ratio (95% CI)b | 0.232 (0.101, 0.529) |
| OS | |
| Events, number (%) | 14 (51.9) | 23 (71.9) |
| Median months (95% CI) | 36.9 (24.9, NR) | 26.1 (15.2, 35.4) |
| Hazard ratio (95% CI)b | 0.556 (0.285, 1.085) |
| Abbreviations: BICR=blinded independent central review; BRCAm=breast cancer gene mutated; CI=confidence interval; CSPS=castration-sensitive prostate cancer; ctDNA=circulating tumour DNA; HRRm=homologous recombination repair gene mutated; mCRPC=metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; N=number of patients; NHT=novel hormone therapy; NR=not reached; OS=overall survival; rPFS=radiographic progression-free survival. * Based on the data cutoff date of 16 August 2022 and a median follow-up for rPFS of 24.9 months (95% CI: 24.7, 25.3) in the talazoparib plus enzalutamide arm, and 24.6 months (95% CI: 22.1, 24.9) in the placebo plus enzalutamide arm. OS is based on the data cutoff date of 3 September 2024 and a median follow-up for OS of 52.5 months (95% CI: 49.9, 53.4) in the talazoparib plus enzalutamide arm and 53.0 months (95% CI: 50.6, 54.0) in the placebo plus enzalutamide arm. a. Derived based on prospective tumour tissue-based results (results known prior to randomisation) and prospective blood-based ctDNA results (results known prior to randomisation). b Hazard ratio based on Cox proportional hazard model stratified by previous treatment with NHT (abiraterone) or taxane-based chemotherapy for CSPC (yes versus no) with < 1 favouring talazoparib. |
At the time of the final OS analysis, in the HRRm subgroup median rPFS was 27.7 months (95% CI: 19.3, 38.4) for patients who received Talzenna in combination with enzalutamide and 13.8 months (95% CI: 10.8, 19.3) for patients who received placebo in combination with enzalutamide (hazard ratio=0.454, 95% CI: 0.305, 0.674); in the non-HRRm subgroup median rPFS was 33.2 months (95% CI: 25.9, 44.2) for patients who received Talzenna in combination with enzalutamide and 22.1 months (95% CI: 16.6, 30.4) for patients who received placebo in combination with enzalutamide (hazard ratio=0.740, 95% CI: 0.565, 0.969); in the BRCAm subgroup median rPFS was not reached (95% CI: 16.8, Not Reached) for patients who received Talzenna in combination with enzalutamide and 11 months (95% CI: 5.9, 13.8) for patients who received placebo in combination with enzalutamide (hazard ratio=0.259, 95% CI: 0.120, 0.558).
Figure 4. Kaplan-Meier curves of rPFS by BICR—TALAPRO-2 (mCRPC)
Abbreviations: BICR=blinded independent central review; CI=confidence interval; mCRPC=metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; PFS=progression-free survival; rPFS=radiographic progression-free survival.
Figure 5. Forest plot of rPFS analyses for key subgroups—TALAPRO-2 (mCRPC)
Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; ctDNA=circulating tumour DNA; E=number of events; ENZA=enzalutamide; HRR=homologous recombination repair; HRRm=homologous recombination repair gene mutated; IWRS=Interactive Web Response System; mCRPC=metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; N=number of patients; NE=not evaluable/not reached; NHT=novel hormone therapy; PBO=placebo; PSA=prostate-specific antigen; rPFS=radiographic progression-free survival; SE=study entry; TALA=talazoparib; w/o=without.
Hazard ratio for all patients was based on a Cox model stratified by the randomization stratification factors. For all subgroups, hazard ratio was based on an unstratified Cox model with treatment as the only covariate. A hazard ratio < 1 favours talazoparib.
HRR status is derived based on prospective tumour tissue-based results and prospective blood-based ctDNA results.
Figure 6. Kaplan-Meier curves of OS—TALAPRO-2 (mCRPC)
Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; mCRPC=metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; OS=overall survival.
Figure 7. Forest plot of OS analyses for key subgroups—TALAPRO-2 (mCRPC)
Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; E=number of events; ENZA=enzalutamide; HRR=homologous recombination repair; HRRm=homologous recombination repair gene mutated; IWRS=Interactive Web Response System; mCRPC=metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; N=number of patients; NHT=novel hormone therapy; OS=overall survival; PSA=prostate-specific antigen; SE=study entry; TALA=talazoparib; w/o=without.
Hazard ratio for all patients was based on a Cox model stratified by the randomization stratification factors. For all subgroups, hazard ratio was based on an unstratified Cox model with treatment as the only covariate.
Percentages calculated based on N, the number of patients in the full analysis set in each treatment group.
Paediatric population
The MHRA has waived the obligation to submit the results of studies with talazoparib in all subsets of the paediatric population in breast cancer and prostate cancer (see section 4.2 for information on paediatric use).