Ellis, MJ

Abstract Background. We previously reported an alternative ESR1 somatic gain-of-function chromosomal translocation event in a patient presenting with aggressive, endocrine therapy resistant estrogen receptor (ER) positive disease, producing an in-frame fusion gene consisting of N-terminal ESR1 and the C-terminus of the Hippo pathway coactivator YAP1 (ESR1-YAP1). We recently identified another ESR1 fusion through RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) in advanced stage ER+ disease from a chest wall recurrence in a male patient that was refractory to multiple lines of treatment. Two examples of fusions discovered in primary breast cancer samples include ESR1 fused in-frame to C-terminal sequences from NOP2 (ESR1-NOP2), identified in a resistant cohort from a RNA-seq screen focused on 81 primary breast cancers from aromatase inhibitor clinical trials, and a second ESR1 fusion, fused in-frame to the entire coding sequence of POLH (ESR1-POLH), that was identified from RNA-seq analysis of 728 Cancer Genome Atlas breast samples. This current study extends our previous characterization of ESR1-YAP1 by comparing functional and pharmacological properties of these three additional ESR1 gene fusion events of both early stage and advanced breast cancers. Methods. In vitro and in vivo experiments were conducted to test ESR1 fusions to induce therapeutic resistance, and metastasis. The transcriptional and binding properties of each fusion was also examined. Pharmacological inhibition with Palbociclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor, was utilized to assess drug sensitivity in ESR1 fusion containing breast cancer cells and in a patient derived xenograft (PDX) model expressing ESR1-YAP1 (WHIM18). Results. The YAP1 and PCDH11x fusions conferred estrogen-independent and fulvestrant-resistant growth. Immunohistochemistry revealed significantly higher numbers of ER+ cells in lungs of mice xenografted with T47D cells expressing the YAP1 and PCDH11x fusions compared to YFP control, NOP2 and POLH fusions. Results from ChIP-seq and microarray studies suggest that these two fusions promote proliferation and metastasis through genomic action by binding estrogen response elements (ERE) and subsequent gene activation. We thereby define these fusions as “canonical” fusions compared to “non-canonical” NOP2 and POLH fusions, which demonstrated dramatically decreased genomic binding ability. The non-canonical fusions induced genes associated with basal-like breast cancer and promoted HER2, EGFR, and MAPK gene expression signatures in contrast to genes associated with cell cycle/proliferation induced by canonical fusions. The proliferative ability of canonical fusion-containing ER+ cells was inhibited by Palbociclib in a dose-dependent manner. In vivo WHIM18 tumors in mice fed with Palbociclib-containing chow demonstrated significantly reduced tumor volume, growth rate, and weight compared to tumors in mice on control chow. Conclusions. In-frame ERE activating canonical fusions occur in end-stage drug resistant advanced breast cancer and can be added to ESR1 point mutations as a class of recurrent somatic mutation that may cause acquired resistance. Growth induced by these fusions can be antagonized by Palbociclib and is potentially clinically helpful. Citation Format: Lei JT, Shao J, Zhang J, Iglesia M, Cao J, Chan DW, He X, Kosaka Y, Schmidt C, Matsunuma R, Haricharan S, Crowder R, Hoog J, Phommaly C, Goncalves R, Ramalho S, Lai W-C, Hampton O, Rogers A, Tobias E, Parikh P, Davies S, Ma C, Suman V, Hunt K, Watson M, Hoadley KA, Thompson A, Chen X, Perou CM, Creighton CJ, Maher C, Ellis MJ. Recurrent functionally diverse in-frame ESR1 gene fusions drive endocrine resistance in breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD2-03.

Abstract Background: Neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy would become a more acceptable alternative to chemotherapy if there was a way to identify AI-resistant cases early for triage to alternate systemic treatment. We therefore conducted a Phase 2 trial of post-menopausal patients with clinical stage 2 or 3 ER+ (Allred Score 6 to 8) breast cancer who were re-biopsied 2 to 4 weeks after initiating neoadjuvant AI therapy. If the tumor Ki67 level was > 10% (AI resistant) the patient was triaged to either chemotherapy or immediate surgery and if < 10% (AI sensitive) the patient completed 16 to 18 weeks of neoadjuvant AI treatment. Co-primary endpoints were: 1) to confirm that the pathological complete response (pCR) rate to standard NCCN chemotherapy in the AI resistant population is in the range of 20% (similar to ER− disease). This required the observation of least 4/35 pCRs; 2) whether patients were willing to accept a recommendation of no chemotherapy when the preoperative endocrine prognostic index score was zero (PEPI-0) (pStage 1 or 2A, Ki67<2.7% and ER+) since, according to the PEPI model, these patients have such a low relapse risk that chemotherapy is unlikely to be of value (Ellis, M JNCI 100:1380–8, 2008). Feasible was defined as <10% PEPI-0 cases receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints included a determination of the distribution of intrinsic subtypes in the AI sensitive and resistant groups (using a research use only assay). Results: 51 patients (21%) had 2 to 4 week Ki67>10%, of these 36 received chemotherapy per protocol (27) anthracycline (A) and taxane (T)-based, 7 T-based, 1 A-only based and 1 other (non-NCCN) regimen but only 2 patients had a pCR (5.5%). 194 patients (79%) had a Ki67 <10%, of these 176 had PEPI score information. 65 had a PEPI-0 (37%), of which 61 (94%) reported a treatment plan that did not include adjuvant chemotherapy. The AI resistant group had a significantly higher frequency of baseline high-risk intrinsic subtypes (LumB: 26, HER2-E: 2 versus LumA: 7) at baseline than the AI sensitive group (LumB: 40, HER2-E: 0 versus LumA: 66) Fishers exact test p = 7.16E−6. Additional molecular data will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion. A Ki67 value >10% at 2 to 4 weeks strongly enriches for high-risk molecular subtypes (mainly LumB) however standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not meet pre-assigned criteria for adequate Phase 2 activity in this group. Novel neoadjuvant approaches for AI resistant-disease defined by high on treatment Ki67 are therefore a high priority. Management of patients with excellent response to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (PEPI-0) without adjuvant chemotherapy is feasible. The ALTERNATE trial will enroll over 2000 patients to establish a new standard of care for neoadjuvant treatment of ER+ HER2− disease based on these principles. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr PD07-01.

Abstract Background: ASP is hypothesized to decrease the risk of breast cancer (BRCA) and BRCA recurrences. Thus we performed an exploratory analysis of ASP and CC use within the NCIC CTG MA.27 adjuvant trial comparing exemestane (E;N=3789) to anastrozole (A; N=3787) with a factorial second randomization to CC or placebo (P). Neither A or E was superior in breast cancer outcomes. Baseline low-dose ASP use is an accepted surrogate of cardiovascular risk factors and was used as a stratification factor across all 4 arms. Randomization to CC-P was discontinued after 18 months (n = 1622) due to concerns of cardiac toxicity. Methods: Patients taking >81mg of ASP daily at baseline were ineligible for randomization and use of >81mg of ASP daily was not allowed. Women enrolled during CC randomization were included in the comparison of E and A, stratified by whether they had been randomized to CC [yes, no;N=1622] and concomitant low-dose ASP [≤81 mg/day (yes, no); N=2209]. Other stratification factors included: lymph-nodes (negative, positive, or unknown); prior adjuvant chemotherapy (yes, no). The primary endpoint, event-free-survival (EFS), was defined as time from randomization to time of locoregional or distant disease recurrence, new primary breast cancer, or death from any cause. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) defined as time from randomization to time of death from any cause and distant disease-free-survival (DDFS), defined as time from randomization to time of distant disease recurrence. Univariate (uni) assessment of CC and ASP use was assessed with stratified log-rank test, adjusting for lymph-node status and adjuvant chemotherapy and applied by intention-to-treat. Exploratory multivariate (multi) analyses (N = 1622) had forced inclusion of treatment and used step-wise forward stratified Cox modeling to examine the effects of CC, ASP use and baseline patient characteristics on outcomes; a factor was added with Wald test statistic p ≤ 0.05. Results: At median follow-up of 4.1 years, 186/1622 (11%) patients had an EFS event; 125 (8%) had died from any cause, and 80 (5%) had distant BRCA relapse. CC did not have significant uni association with outcomes: EFS p-value=0.92; OS p-value p = 0.56; DDFS p-value=0.55. ASP use was associated with worse EFS [p = 0.006, HR 1.48 (95% CI 1.12–1.96)], worse OS [p = 0.0002, HR 1.87 (95% CI (1.35–2.61)], and non-significant difference in DDFS (p = 0.72). CC had no multi association with EFS, OS or DDFS. ASP use had no multi association with EFS and DDFS (p > 0.05). However, ASP use had multi prognostic association with worse OS [p = 0.01; HR 1.67 (95% CI 1.13–2.49)]. Conclusions: Users of either CC or low dose ASP had similar DDFS to non-users in MA.27. As expected, low-dose ASP users (with presumptive cardiovascular risk factors) had worse OS than non-users. Inadequate numbers of patients randomized to CC and lack of randomization to aspirin leaves inadequate evidence from MA.27 to determine whether anti-inflammatories influence breast cancer outcomes. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-13-02.

Abstract Background: Intrinsic breast cancer subtypes determined by the PAM50 assay are reported to be prognostic independent of standard clinicopathological variables. The CALGB (Alliance) 9741 adjuvant trial randomized treatment in a 2×2 factorial design to (i) 2-wk (dose dense; DD) vs 3-wk therapy and (ii) sequential vs concurrent doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, paclitaxel (A>T>C vs AC>T). DD therapy improved disease-free survival and overall survival (OS) (Citron et al. JCO 2003.). A significant interaction between intrinsic breast cancer subtypes and the use of DD therapy was hypothesized. Methods: C9741 was conducted in collaboration with ECOG, NCCTG, and SWOG. Biospecimens were collected from 1652 of 2005 subjects. Multiplexed gene expression profiling (NanoString Technologies, Inc) generated PAM50 subtype calls (luminal A, luminal B, HER2-enriched, basal-like), risk of relapse (ROR) score, and proliferation score for 1321 cases (80%). Excluded samples were due to insufficient tumor (n = 181) or RNA (n = 150). The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival (RFS). The primary analysis to determine if the clinical benefit of DD therapy is dependent on intrinsic subtype was conducted as a test of interaction in a Cox proportional hazards model (3 degrees of freedom, df; alpha=0.05). Similar analyses were performed for ROR score and proliferation score as continuous measures of risk (1 df). PAM50 subtype, ROR score, and proliferation score were evaluated in separate multivariate models adjusting for number of positive nodes, menopausal status, dose density, and sequence of therapy. Results: Improved outcomes for DD therapy in the evaluable subset mirrored results from the complete dataset (HR = 1.20; 95%CI 0.99–1.44) with a median follow-up of 12.3 yrs. Subtype analysis identified 32% luminal A (n = 417), 26% luminal B (n = 341), 20% HER2-enriched (n = 267), and 22% basal-like (n = 296). Intrinsic subtypes were prognostic of RFS (p < 0.0001) irrespective of treatment assignment with HRs relative to the luminal A subgroup of 1.50 (luminal B), 1.70 (HER2-enriched) and 1.66 (basal-like). No subtype specific treatment effect on RFS was identified (p = 0.44). ROR scores (range 0–100, median 60) were also prognostic of RFS (HR = 1.12 for a 10-unit change; 95% CI 1.07–1.18; p < 0.0001), but no association with DD therapy benefit was seen (p = 0.58). Similar results were obtained for the proliferation score, for OS as a secondary endpoint, and from multivariate models with clinical covariates. Conclusion: The prognostic value of PAM50 subtype, ROR score, and proliferation score remains highly significant in patients treated with contemporary adjuvant anthracycline and taxane based chemotherapy. Intrinsic subtype did not predict for improved survival with the 2-wk DD vs 3-wk treatment schedule; we hypothesize that this is because the prognostic differences by subtype outweighed the modest but significant clinical benefit of DD chemotherapy administration for the overall population. Planned clinical validation studies will assess the ability of PAM50 and other gene signatures to stratify patients and individualize systemic therapy regimens based on the expected risk of distant recurrence. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-10-01.

Abstract Background: The non-steroidal reversible aromatase inhibitor (AI), anastrozole (A) is approved as adjuvant monotherapy in hormone receptor (HR) positive early breast cancer (EBC). The steroidal irreversible AI exemestane (E) is approved in sequence after an initial 2-3 years of tamoxifen. MA27 tested the hypothesis that exemestane would have greater efficacy and better end-organ safety than anastrozole for several reasons: E is an irreversible and more potent AI than A; unlike A, E does not induce intra-tumoral aromatase and; through its mild androgenic activity E may exert a second anti-tumor effect and a more favorable bone and lipid metabolism profile than A. Initially the study also tested the role of a cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, celecoxib, used in combination with an AI. However, celecoxib was discontinued early in MA27 following identification of cardiovascular toxicity with COX-2 inhibitors. Methods: Postmenopausal women with hormone receptor positive primary breast cancer were randomized after adequate local treatment to 5 years of adjuvant A (1mg/day) or E (25mg/day) with or without celecoxib/placebo (400mg/plac twice daily for 3 years). The primary objective is the comparison of event free survival (EFS) between women treated with A or E. Secondary objectives include overall survival (OS), distant recurrence (DDFS), incidence of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) and safety. Quality of Life in a subset of women has been evaluated, and a very extensive tissue bank created. Stratification included: prior chemotherapy; lymph node status, celecoxib (during use), aspirin use (during randomization to celecoxib), and trastuzumab use (since November 2005). The primary endpoint (EFS) will look for an improvement from 87.5% to 89.9%; HR 0.80, 2-sided 5% level and 80% power, with 644 events required. Results: 7576 women were randomized between June 2003 and July 2008. Celecoxib/placebo, was discontinued 2 years into the trial in December 2004 after 1635 patients had received celecoxib. The number of events required for final analysis was reached April 2010. Patient characteristics were balanced for age (median 64.1yrs); race; ECOG PS; mastectomy; TNM staging and; prior adjuvant chemotherapy. EFS, OS, DDFS, and CBC as well as clinical fractures, cardiovascular events and adverse events will be presented by arm in the final analysis. Conclusions: NCIC CTG MA.27 is the first definitive EBC trial comparing a non-steroidal and steroidal AI as initial adjuvant therapy. Exemestane is not currently approved as initial adjuvant treatment and superiority or equivalence will lead to its inclusion as a first-line option for EBC in postmenopausal HR positive breast cancer. Efficacy, clinical fractures, cardiovascular events and AI related symptoms will help to define the cost-benefit ratios of these two AIs. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr S1-1.