Mardis, E. R.

Abstract Background: In MBC, CTC enumeration is highly prognostic for both progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Multiparametric technologies enable for expanded phenotypic profiling of CTCs, including ER and HER2 assessment. Limited information is available on the concordance of CTC ER and HER2 levels compared to synchronously obtained tissue. We assessed the prognostic performance of CTC enumeration and phenotypic profiling of ER and HER2 on CTCs. Methods: The prospective, multi-institutional Aurora study enrolled pts with MBC of any subtype either at diagnosis of metastatic disease or at time of progression on any line of systemic therapy. Pts underwent a metastatic site biopsy, consented to archival primary tissue collection and donated blood samples serially every 3-4 months until progression. CTCs, from blood collected at study entry, were identified as nucleated, EpCAM+/ cytokeratin+/ CD45- cells using an automated imaging system (RareCyte, Seattle). ER and HER2 expression levels were measured by mean fluorescence intensity (MFI), with thresholds above 80 (ER) and 160 (HER2) considered positive. Comparisons were made to total RNAseq from paired metastatic tissue biopsies. PFS and OS were calculated from the time of study entry to last follow up or death. Results: Baseline CTC enumeration was performed in 154 pts. The most common clinical subtype was HR+/HER2- (59.7%), followed by HER2-positive (16.8%) and TNBC (15.5%). The median lines of prior therapy were 1 (range 0-10). At least 1 CTC was identified in 68/154 pts (44%), 30 (19%) had ≥ 5 CTCs, and 15 (9.7%) had CTC clusters. The median CTC value was 0 (0-877). The presence of CTCs (≥1 or ≥5) and CTC clusters was adversely associated with PFS and OS (Table 1 Table 1. CTC survival analyses Number Median PFS PFS HR (95% CI) Median OS OS HR (95% CI) Presence of CTC 0 CTC 86 7.37 (0.03 - 43.1) reference 20.72 (0.03 - 50.6) reference ≥ 1 CTC 68 4.7 (0.43 - 19.5) 1.65 (1.16-2.36) 12.04. (0.43-44.1) 2.13 (1.44-3.16) Presence of ≥ 5 CTC <5 CTC 124 7.7 (0.03 - 43.1) reference 19.31 (0.03 - 50.6) reference ≥ 5 CTC 30 2.88 (0.43 - 18.7) 1.77 (1.15 - 2.71) 5.74 (0.43 - 29.3) 3.59 (2.26-5.70) Presence of clusters 0 clusters 139 7.37 (0.03 - 43.1) reference 18.06 (0.03 - 50.6) reference ≥ 1 cluster 15 1.91 (0.43 - 18.7) 2.06 (1.16 - 3.68) 3.42 (0.43 - 18.7) 5.44 (2.94-10.09) ). Across all subtypes, the median CTC ER-MFI across was 36.2 (range 4.2-10,016.6) and the median HER2-MFI was 139.6 (range 4.2-2480.5). We observed high intra-patient heterogeneity of ER-MFI (CV: 0.65 [0.34-1.25]) and HER2-MFI (CV: 0.79 [0.42-1.54]). Clinical metastatic subtype from metastasis at study entry was available in 54/68 pts with CTCs. Pts with clinical ER+ MBC had a higher median ER-MFI compared to clinical TNBC (111.9 vs 68.6, p = 0.02). However, 11 pts (26.8%) with clinical ER+ MBC had all CTCs with an ER-MFI <80. Lower ER expression was observed in CTCs collected after prior exposure to a SERD (median ER-MFI: post-SERD [n=8] 27 vs post-aromatase inhibitor [n=4] 252, p<2.22e-16). No correlations were observed between the median CTC ER-MFI or HER2-MFI and paired tissue ESR1 or ERBB2 RNA expression (n=66). Conclusions: CTCs are strongly predictive of PFS and OS. CTC ER- and HER2-MFI were highly heterogeneous without clear correlation with bulk tissue RNA expression. The clinical impact of discordant clinical receptor status and CTC receptor status warrants further exploration. Citation Format: K. V. Giridhar, W. C. Nenad, H. Ye, G. L. Wheeler, T. Hinoue, A. R. Michmerhuizen, B. M. Felsheim, U. R. Chandran, B. J. Kelly, E. R. Mardis, P. W. Laird, J. M. Balko, A. C. Garrido-Castro, S. Coppens, J. Bowen, R. Nanda, N. U. Lin, C. K. Anders, C. Isaacs, J. J. Tao, J. D. Anampa, N. Jahan, L. Huppert, A. DeMichele, B. H. Park, S. Vinayak, A. L. Delson, M. M. Magbanua, M. Balic, H. A. Parsons, A. V. Lee, L. A. Carey, L. Norton, A. C. Wolff, N. E. Davidson, I. Krop, T. A. King, C. M. Perou, K. A. Hoadley, Aurora US Metastases Network. Characterizing circulating tumor cell (CTC) enumeration and phenotypic profiling in blood with synchronously obtained tissue in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in TBCRC /AURORA US [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS2-07-17.

Abstract Background: Patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) often have short survival, and clinical disease management is challenging due to tumor heterogeneity, treatment resistance, and unique contributions of organ-specific metastatic microenvironments. Methods: The retrospective and prospective phases of the AURORA US Metastasis Project have profiled samples from 220 MBC patients using RNA-seq, DNA-seq, and DNA methylation arrays. RNA-seq has been performed on 392 specimens from 143 primary tumors and 249 metastases. In total, there are 162 primary-metastasis pairs from 134 patients (13 patients have 2+ metastases profiled). The 249 metastatic samples include 116 liver, 29 lymph node, 17 lung, 14 bone, 10 brain, and 8 skin metastases. Each specimen was assayed to determine its clinical and molecular subtypes. Here we investigate the molecular causes of clinical and PAM50 subtype switching in primary tumor-metastasis pairs using multi-platform data. Results: Of the patients with paired data in the AURORA dataset, 38/134 (28%) had clinical subtype (HR+/HER2+, HR-/HER2+, HR+/HER2-, TNBC) switches between the primary tumor and paired metastasis. The most common clinical subtype switch was loss of hormone receptor expression (16/38 patients) in the metastatic tumor. Many of these observations have been confirmed by concomitant RNA and/or DNA changes. In addition, 59/134 (44%) patients had PAM50 molecular subtype switches. 26/59 (44%) patients had a Luminal A primary tumor which switched either into Luminal B (16/26) or HER2-Enriched (7/26) subtypes, suggesting recurrent progression mechanisms during metastasis. For example, patient ARRP had a Luminal A primary tumor and a HER2-Enriched bone metastasis. Using DNA clonality data, we identified a clonal mutation in the DNA binding domain of FOXA1 (H247L) as well as mutations in CDH1 (frameshift) and NLRC3 (Q650H) that originated in the primary tumor. A distinct, dominant clone arose in the metastasis, harboring oncogenic activating mutations in PIK3CA (H1047R) and ERBB2 (L869R). There was also an increase in RNA expression of ERBB2 and FGFR4 but no change in ERBB2 copy number. This is in alignment with previous publications demonstrating a shift to the HER2-Enriched subtype, often without gain of HER2 amplification. Interestingly, there were 21 patients that had both clinical and PAM50 subtype switches. Patient ANFC had a HR+/HER2- primary tumor (Luminal A) and a TNBC liver metastasis (HER2-Enriched). Notably, the metastasis lost clinical expression of ER and PR (by IHC), and this was also observed through a decrease in ESR1 and PGR mRNA expression. Using DNA clonality data, we identified 5 new clones in the metastasis that were not present in the primary tumor. Finally, we observed that basal-like primary tumors with a PAM50 subtype switch in the paired metastasis had a significantly lower correlation to the basal-like centroid compared to primary tumors with a basal-like paired metastasis (p=0.0053). This suggests that either these tumors had significant intra-tumoral heterogeneity in the primary tumor and the metastasis originated from a non-basal-like portion of the tumor, or the switches from a basal-like primary tumor are a byproduct of the PAM50 bioinformatics algorithm (i.e. the tumor is very close to 2 subtype centroids). Ongoing analyses will precisely determine which subtype switches can be attributed to genetic or epigenetic causes, organ site biases, and/or bioinformatic methodologies. Conclusions: Using multi-platform molecular analyses, we identified cases of clinical and molecular subtype switching in primary-metastasis pairs. These findings begin to elucidate the underlying molecular drivers of tumor progression and subtype switching in patients with MBC, which may have implications for clinical treatment. Citation Format: A. R. Michmerhuizen, B. M. Felsheim, G. L. Wheeler, B. J. Kelly, M. Singha, T. Hinoue, W. C. Nenad, A. C. Garrido-Castro, J. M. Balko, K. Giridhar, U. Chandran, A. V. Lee, L. A. Carey, T. A. King, K. A. Hoadley, P. W. Laird, E. R. Mardis, C. M. Perou, AURORA US Metastasis Network. Molecular causes of subtype switching in primary and metastatic breast tumor pairs from the AURORA US Project [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD2-06.