Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 31, 2025

Endobronchial Ultrasound-guided Intratumoral Injection of Cisplatin for the Treatment of Isolated Mediastinal Recurrence of Lung Cancer
Published on: February 12, 2017
Olaparib maintenance versus placebo monotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (PIN): A
Dean A Fennell1, Catharine Porter2, Jason Lester3
1University of Leicester & University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
Background:
Impaired double strand DNA repair by homologous repair deficiency (HRD) leads to sensitivity to poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibition. Poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors target HRD to induce synthetic lethality and are used routinely in the treatment of BRCA1 mutated ovarian cancer in the platinum-sensitive maintenance setting. A subset of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) harbour impaired DNA double strand break repair. We therefore hypothesised that patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer exhibiting partial responses to platinum doublet-based chemotherapy, might enrich for impaired HRD, rendering these tumours more sensitive to inhibition of PARP inhibition by olaparib.
Methods:
The Olaparib Maintenance versus Placebo Monotherapy in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer trial (PIN) was a multicentre double-blind placebo controlled randomised phase II screening trial. This study was conducted at 23 investigative hospital sites in the UK. Patients had advanced (stage IIIB/IV) squamous (Sq) or non-squamous (NSq) NSCLC, and had to be chemo-naive, European Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1. Prior immunotherapy with a PD1 or PDL1 inhibitor was allowed. Patients could be registered for PIN prior to (stage 1), or after (stage 2) initiation of induction chemotherapy. If any tumour shrinkage was observed (any shrinkage of RECIST target lesions), following a minimum of 3 cycles of platinum doublet chemotherapy, patients were randomised 1:1 using a centralised online system, to either olaparib (300 mg twice daily by mouth in 21-day cycles) or placebo, which was continued until disease progression, or unacceptable toxicity. Intention to treat (ITT) analyses of the primary endpoint included all randomised participants. Per protocol (PP) safety analysis included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), with a one-sided p-value of 0.2 to demonstrate statistical significance. Hazard ratios (HR) for PFS were both unadjusted and adjusted for the randomisation balancing factors (smoking status and histology). The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01788332) and EudraCT (2012-003383-51).
Findings:
A total of 940 patients were assessed for stage 1 eligibility of whom 263 were registered between Feb 24, 2014 and Nov 7, 2017. 194 patients were excluded prior to stage 2 (no tumour shrinkage or unevaluable) and 70 were randomised; 32 (46%) to Olaparib and 38 (54%) to placebo. 4% (3/70) of patients randomised had a CR and 96% (67/70) had a PR (or other evidence of tumour response/mixed stable) during induction therapy. A total of 36 patients were registered in stage 2 only, i.e., post induction therapy. Intention to treat (ITT) unadjusted analysis showed a PFS hazard ratio (HR) of 0.83 (one-sided 80% CI upper limit 1.03, one-sided unadjusted log rank test p-value=0.23). ITT Cox-adjusted model showed a HR 0.73 (one-sided 80% CI upper limit 0.91, one sided p-value 0.11). Adverse events were reported in 31/32 subjects (97%) in the olaparib arm and 38/38 (100%) in the placebo group. The most commonly reported adverse events in the olaparib group were fatigue (20/31; 65%), nausea (17/31; 55%), anaemia (15/31; 48%) and dyspnea (13/31; 42%). In the placebo group the most common adverse events were fatigue (25/38; 66%), coughing (22/38; 58%), dyspnea (15/38; 39%) and nausea (11/38; 29%). There were no treatment-related deaths.
Interpretation:
PFS was longer in the olaparib arm, but this did not reach statistical significance. When the PFS HR was adjusted for smoking status and histology, a significant difference at the one-sided 0.2 level was observed, suggesting that tumour control may be achieved for chemosensitive NSCLC treated with PARP monotherapy. We speculate that this signal may be driven by a molecular subgroup harbouring HRD.
Funding:
This study was funded between AstraZeneca CRUK, National Cancer Research Institute, and Cancer Research UK Feasibility Study Committee.
Insights
Poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors show promise in treating non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with homologous repair deficiency (HRD). Olaparib maintenance therapy demonstrated a trend towards improved progression-free survival in NSCLC patients responding to chemotherapy.
Area of Science:
- Oncology
- Genetics
- Pharmacology
Background:
- Impaired DNA double-strand break repair via homologous repair deficiency (HRD) confers sensitivity to poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors.
- PARP inhibitors are established in treating BRCA1-mutated ovarian cancer, inducing synthetic lethality in HRD tumors.
- A subset of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) exhibits impaired DNA repair mechanisms, suggesting potential sensitivity to PARP inhibition.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the efficacy of olaparib maintenance therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC who achieved partial responses to platinum doublet chemotherapy.
- To determine if partial response to chemotherapy enriches for tumors with homologous repair deficiency (HRD), making them sensitive to PARP inhibition.
- To evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) in NSCLC patients randomized to olaparib or placebo after initial chemotherapy response.
Main Methods:
- A multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase II screening trial (PIN) involving 70 advanced NSCLC patients.
- Patients received olaparib (300 mg twice daily) or placebo until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, following initial platinum doublet chemotherapy.
- Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), analyzed using intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations with a one-sided p-value of 0.2.
Main Results:
- While unadjusted ITT analysis did not reach statistical significance (HR 0.83, p=0.23), an adjusted ITT analysis showed a significant PFS benefit for olaparib (HR 0.73, p=0.11).
- A trend towards longer PFS was observed in the olaparib arm (32 patients) compared to placebo (38 patients).
- Common adverse events in the olaparib arm included fatigue, nausea, anemia, and dyspnea; no treatment-related deaths occurred.
Conclusions:
- Adjusted analysis suggests olaparib maintenance may improve PFS in chemosensitive NSCLC, potentially driven by a subgroup with homologous repair deficiency (HRD).
- The study indicates a potential role for PARP inhibitors in a select group of NSCLC patients.
- Further investigation into molecular subgroups with HRD is warranted to optimize PARP inhibitor therapy in NSCLC.
Related Concept Videos
Treatment Resistant Cancers
Targeted Cancer Therapies
There are several types of targeted therapies against...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Treatment for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Phosphodiesterase Inhibitors
Among the PDE5 inhibitors, sildenafil (Revatio) stands out as a competitive and selective inhibitor. It operates by elevating cellular levels of cGMP and augmenting signaling through the cGMP-PKG pathway, promoting vasodilation. Upon oral...

