200P OlympiAD: Exploratory analysis of olaparib vs capecitabine in patients with germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm) metastatic breast cancer (mBC)

Following the introduction of olaparib into early and mBC settings, there have been questions about optimal sequencing decision-making between capecitabine. While are no data to support decisions in setting, phase III randomised OlympiAD trial (NCT02000622) showed significantly longer PFS with vs single-agent chemotherapy physician’s choice (TPC; capecitabine, eribulin, or vinorelbine), patients gBRCAm HER2-negative who had received ≤2 previous regimens for metastatic disease (Table). We report an exploratory post-hoc analysis comparing efficacy capecitabine from primary (data cut-off 9 Dec 2016). Patients were 300 mg twice daily (n=205) TPC (n=97; which n=43 2500 mg/m2 14 days every 21 days). Analyses conducted all those triple-negative BC (TNBC). Post-hoc analyses compared capecitabine-eligible (i.e., would if they TPC). The endpoint was by blinded independent central review. In analysed populations, associated improved median Safety aligned published data.Table: 200PPFS reviewPopulationOlaparibComparator (TPC capecitabine)HR (95% CI)Events n/N (%)Median, monthsEvents monthsAll patientsOlaparib TPC163/205 (79.5)7.071/97 (73.2)4.20.58 (0.43–0.80); p=0.0009*Capecitabine-eligible patient subgroup: Olaparib capecitabine72/95 (75.8)8.232/43 (74.4)4.20.55 (0.34–0.89)Patients TNBCOlaparib TPC81/102 (79.4)5.640/48 (83.3)2.90.43 (0.29–0.63)Capecitabine-eligible capecitabine34/44 (77.3)5.920/23 (87.0)2.90.32 (0.16– 0.64)∗OlympiAD powered assess benefit this population. Open table a new tab ∗OlympiAD acceptable safety profile mBC. These results may aid treatment selection BC. Limitations included nature small sample sizes.