Wolf, DM

Abstract ctDNA analysis offers a non-invasive approach for monitoring response and resistance to treatment. Serial ctDNA testing during neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) may provide early indicators of emerging resistance and disease progression. In this study, we analyzed ctDNA from high-risk early breast cancer patients who received NAT and definitive surgery in the I-SPY 2 TRIAL (NCT01042379). We hypothesize that (1) assessment of ctDNA levels early in treatment will improve the performance of molecular and imaging-based predictors of pathologic complete response (pCR) to NAT; and (2) levels of ctDNA after NAT are associated with residual cancer burden and recurrence [distant recurrence free survival (DRFS)]. Methods: ctDNA analysis was performed in 84 high-risk stage II and III breast cancer patients randomized to neoadjuvant investigational agent (n=52), AKT inhibitor MK-2206 (M) in combination with paclitaxel (T) followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) (M+T->AC), or standard-of-care (T->AC) (n=32). HER2+ patients also received trastuzumab (H). Serial plasma was collected before NAT (T0), early treatment (3 weeks, T1), between regimens (12 weeks, T2), and after NAT prior to surgery (T3). Mutational profiles derived from pretreatment tumor biopsy and normal matched DNA whole exome sequencing were used to design personalized assays targeting 16 patient-specific somatic variants to detect ctDNA in serial plasma. Results: Of the 84 patients in this study, 43% were HR-/HER2- (TNBC), 35% HR+/HER2-, and 23% HER2+. In total, 74% (61 of 83), 35% (28 of 79), 14% (9 of 65), and 8% (5 of 61) were positive for ctDNA at timepoints T0, T1, T2, and T3, respectively. At T0, ctDNA positivity and levels (average number of mutant molecules detected per mL) were significantly associated with increased tumor burden (by clinical and MRI examination), more aggressive tumor biology (as reflected in higher Mammaprint scores and grade) and subtype (HER2+ and TNBC). Twenty-seven percent (27%) of the 84 patients achieved a pCR and all patients who were ctDNA-positive at T3 (n=5) did not achieve a pCR. Currently, data are being collected to: (1) assess the relationship of ctDNA and MRI imaging in predicting tumor response to therapy; (2) examine the relationship of ctDNA levels before and after NAT with 3-year DRFS and event-free survival (EFS). The results of these analyses will be presented at the SABCS 2018 meeting. Conclusions: Our study provides a platform to evaluate the clinical significance of ctDNA for serial monitoring of response to NAT. Accurate and early response prediction by highly sensitive ctDNA analysis can facilitate a timely and judicious change in treatment to improve patients' chances of achieving a pCR. Finally, personalized ctDNA testing may complement imaging and pathologic evaluation of tumor response to fine-tune pCR as a surrogate endpoint for improved DRFS and EFS. Citation Format: Magbanua MJM, Brown-Swigart L, Hirst GL, Yau C, Wolf D, Ma AA, Bergin E, Venters S, Sethi H, Wu H-T, Salari R, Tin T, Sawyer S, Louie M, Zimmermann B, Lin C-HJ, Keats J, Liang WS, Cuyugan L, Enriquez D, Tripathy D, Chien AJ, Forero A, DeMichele A, Liu M, Delson AL, Asare S, Esserman L, van't Veer L, I-SPY 2 Consortium. Personalized serial circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis in high-risk early stage breast cancer patients to monitor and predict response to neoadjuvant therapy and outcome in the I-SPY 2 TRIAL [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD2-01.

Abstract Background: The explosion in new treatment options targeting immune checkpoints, HER signaling, DNA repair deficiency, AKT, and other pathways calls for updated breast cancer subtypes beyond HR and HER2 status to predict which patients will respond to which treatments. Here we leverage the I-SPY 2 TRIAL biomarker program over the past 8 years across 10 treatment arms to elucidate a minimal set of biomarkers that may improve response prediction in a modern treatment context, and to investigate which new patient phenotypes are identified by these response-predictive biomarkers. Methods: 986 patients were considered in this analysis. Treatments included paclitaxel alone (or with trastuzumab (H) in HER2+) or combined with investigational agents: veliparib/carboplatin (VC); neratinib; MK2206; ganitumab; ganetespib; AMG386; TDM1/pertuzumab (P); H/P; and pembrolizumab (Pembro). 24 prospectively defined, mechanism-of-action and pathway-based expression and phospho-protein signatures/biomarkers assayed from pre-treatment biopsies were previously found to be predictive in a particular agent/arm in pre-specified analysis. Here we evaluate these biomarkers in all patients. We assessed association between each biomarker and response in the population as a whole and within each arm and HR/HER2 subtype using a logistic model. To identify optimal dichotomizing thresholds for select biomarkers, 2-fold cross-validation was repeated 500 times. Our analysis is exploratory and does not adjust for multiplicities. Results: Our initial set of 24 predictive biomarkers reflects DNA repair deficiency (n=2), immune activation (n=7), ER signaling (n=2), HER2 signaling (n=4), proliferation (n=2), phospho-activation of AKT/mTOR (n=2), and ANG/TIE2 (n=1) pathways, among others. Biomarkers reflecting similar biology are correlated and cluster together. We make use of this correlation structure to reduce the dimensionality of the biomarker set to five predictive signals: proliferation, DNA repair deficiency (DRD), immune-engaged (Immune+), luminal/ER (lum), and HER2-activated. These biomarkers, when dichotomized, identify patient groups with differential predicted sensitivities to I-SPY 2 agents and are present at different proportions within receptor subtypes. For instance, in the HER2- subset, Immune+/DRD+ patients are predicted sensitive to both VC and Pembro, and account for 39% of TN, but only 12% of HR+HER2-. On the other end of the spectrum, only 17% of TN are Immune-/DRD-, compared to the majority (56%) of HR+HER2-. There are also subsets of patients positive for only one marker. For the HER2+ subset, 67% are HER2-activated+, and 25% lum+; of these HER2-activated+ patients are more likely to be Immune+ (44%), vs 23% in lum+. HER2-activated+/Immune+ patients have higher predicted sensitivity to HER2-targeted agents than lum+ or Immune- patients. In all, these molecular phenotypes predict sensitivity to one or more I-SPY 2 investigational agents for 75% of the ˜ 1000 patients. Conclusion: Molecular phenotypes reflecting proliferation, immune engagement, HER2-activation, luminal/ER-signaling, and DNA repair deficiency may provide a roadmap to guide treatment prioritization for emerging therapeutics. Citation Format: Wolf DM, Yau C, Wulfkuhle J, Petricoin E, Campbell M, Brown-Swigart L, Hirst G, Asare S, Zhu Z, Lee EP, Delson A, Pohlmann P, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Hylton N, Liu MC, Symmans F, DeMichele A, Yee D, Berry D, Esserman L, van 't Veer L. Identifying breast cancer molecular phenotypes to predict response in a modern treatment landscape: Lessons from ˜1000 patients across 10 arms of the I-SPY 2 TRIAL [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-10-02.

Abstract Background: Pembrolizumab (Pembro), an anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, has been approved for the treatment of a variety of cancers including melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, and urothelial carcinoma. Pembro was recently evaluated in HER2- breast cancer patients in the neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 TRIAL and graduated in the triple negative (TN), HR+HER2-, and HER2- signatures. HER2- patients were randomized to receive Pembro+paclitaxel followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (P+T -> AC) vs. T -> AC. We and others have shown that TN breast cancers tend to have high numbers of immune infiltrates, including T cells and tumor associated macrophages (TAMs). We evaluated expression signatures representing 14 immune cell types (TILs, T cells, CD8 T cells, exhausted T cells, Th1, Tregs, cytotoxic cells, NK, NK CD56dim, dendritic cells, mast cells, B cells, macrophages, and neutrophils) as specific predictors of response to Pembro. Methods: Data from 248 patients (Pembro: 69; controls: 179) were available. Pre-treatment biopsies were assayed using Agilent gene expression arrays. Signature scores are calculated by averaging cell type specific genes. All I-SPY 2 qualifying biomarker analyses follow a pre-specified analysis plan. We used logistic modeling to assess biomarker performance. A biomarker is considered a specific predictor of Pembro response if it associates with response in the Pembro arm but not the control arm, and if the biomarker x treatment interaction is significant (likelihood ratio test, p<0.05). This analysis is also performed adjusting for HR status as covariates, and within receptor subsets. For successful biomarkers, we use Bayesian modeling to estimate the pCR rates of 'predicted sensitive' patients in each arm. Our statistics are descriptive rather than inferential and do not adjust for multiplicities of other biomarkers outside this study. Results: 10 out of the 14 cell-type signatures tested are associated with response in the Pembro arm. Higher expression levels of 9 of these cell-type signatures are associated with higher pCR rates (T cells, exhausted T cells, Th1, cytotoxic cells, NK, NK CD56dim, dendritic cells, B cells, and macrophages), whereas higher mast cell signature expression is associated with non-pCR. Interestingly, many of these same signatures also associate or trend towards association with response in the control arm; and in a model adjusting for HR status, only 3 of these signatures (Th1, B cells and dendritic cells) show significant interaction with treatment. Within the whole population and the TN subtype, the dendritic cell signature is the strongest predictor of specific response to Pembro (OR/1SD: 4.04 and 4.4, LR p < 0.001 overall and in TN). Although other immune signatures (T cells, exhausted T cells, NK, and macrophages) also associate with response in the Pembro arm in the TN subtype, only the dendritic cell and Th1 signatures have a significant interaction with treatment. In contrast, in the HR+HER2- subtype, only 3 signatures (Th1, B cells, and mast cells) associate with response to Pembro; but none of these signatures have significant interaction with treatment. Of note, in both the Pembro and control arms, HR+HER2- patients with higher average mast cell marker expression have lower pCR rates (OR/1SD: 0.33 and 0.51, LRp: 0.006 and 0.04 in Pembro and control arm). Conclusion: As expected, multiple immune cell expression signatures are predictive of response in the Pembro arm; but only dendritic cells and Th1 cells are specific to Pembro in both the population as a whole and the TN subtype. Interestingly, the presence of mast cells may impede response, especially in HR+HER2- patients. Correlation of these signatures with multiplex-IF immune markers is pending. Citation Format: Campbell M, Yau C, Borowsky A, Vandenberg S, Wolf D, Rimm D, Nanda R, Liu M, Brown-Swigart L, Hirst G, Asare S, van't Veer L, Yee D, DeMichele A, Berry D, Esserman L. Analysis of immune infiltrates (assessed via multiplex fluorescence immunohistochemistry) and immune gene expression signatures as predictors of response to the checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab in the neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD6-08.