Goetz, Matthew P.

Abstract Introduction Serial assessments of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) provide independent prognostic significance for progression free survival and overall survival. A low CTC burden (<5 CTCs / 7.5mL blood) at baseline is favorable prognostically, and reduction of CTCs during treatment indicates response to treatment (Janni, CCR 2025). Despite increasing evidence supporting its clinical validity, real-time serial CTC enumeration has not been utilized broadly in clinical practice in the U.S. The ACT-MBC study is a prospective observational study to evaluate the impact of serial CTC testing on treatment decisions and response assessment (NCT05662345). Provider (physician or advanced practitioner) perception of CTC testing is measured with questionnaires at baseline (PQ1), and for each pt during the first restaging visit (PQ2), and at the end of the study (PQ3). We previously reported PQ1 results (Giridhar, SABCS 2024). Here, we report on results of PQ2. Methods ACT-MBC prospectively enrolled patients (pts) at Mayo Clinic Rochester and Mayo Clinic Health Systems sites (Mankato, Albert Lea and Eau Claire). Pts with MBC were enrolled at time of progressive disease during any line of therapy (TNBC) or ≥2nd line metastatic therapy for ER+/HER2- disease. Pts were tested for CTCs using the FDA-cleared CellSearch® assay which included enumeration and biomarker testing on CTCs for ER, HER2, and PD-L1. The treating clinician determined the regimen and timing of restaging scans. CTC testing was performed once per cycle (every 3-4 weeks) with results returned to the treating provider within 7 days. We descriptively summarized PQ2 responses from providers who had at least one on-treatment CTC result available by the first restaging visit. We report the proportion (90% CI) of providers who agreed or strongly agreed that assessing CTCs enhanced their ability to determine response to therapy and that the CTC results helped guide their decision to continue or change therapy (co-primary endpoints) while accounting for within provider correlation. Results As of June 25, 2025, 15 providers enrolled a median of 2 pts each (range: 1 to 15 pts) and completed PQ2 surveys on 40 pts. 7 providers (47%) practiced in the community setting and 4 (27%) were nurse practitioners. Most pts were female (98%), White (98%), and had ER+/HER2- MBC (80%). Baseline (C1) CTC results were elevated (≥5 CTCs) in 24 (60%) pts (CTC range 0-609). At C2 (n=39), CTC values remained undetected in 7 pts, decreased in 21 pts, increased in 8 pts, and remained unchanged in 3 pts. At PQ2 (n=40), based on clinician interpretation of radiographic findings, results showed 2.5% of pts with complete response, 20% with partial response, 25% with stable disease, 17.5% with mixed response, and 35% with progressive disease. Clinicians reported that CTC results were concordant with imaging results in 34 (85%) responses, discordant with imaging in 7.5% of responses, and unclear in the remaining 7.5% of responses. Most clinicians (82.5%) agreed or strongly agreed that assessing CTCs enhanced their ability to determine response to therapy (90% CI: 68.3%, 96.7%). Further, 70% of providers agreed or strongly agreed that the CTC results helped guide their decision to continue or change therapy (90% CI: 50.8%, 89.2%). 32.5% of the time, CTCs results influenced the timing of the first restaging scans. In 11/25 pts without progressing disease, CTC results influenced the timing of future scans. In the 7/8 pts with a mixed response at first restaging scans with decreasing CTCs, 4 remained on the same systemic therapy. Conclusions Oncologists in academic and community practice responded that serial CTC assessments enhance ability to determine response of therapy, guide decisions to continue or change treatments, and influence timing of radiographic assessments. Citation Format: K. V. Giridhar, D. Zahrieh, M. Hanna, A. Singh, E. Al-Hattab, P. Schumacher, J. Carroll, J. Hoppenworth, T. Haddad, A. Tevaarwerk, B. Rudder, G. M. Choong, S. Basu, R. A. Leon-Ferre, T. O'Brien, A. Lewis, F. de Snoo, L. Stork-Sloots, F. K. Kuhr, S. Lazaro, R. Prendergast, D. S. Spinner, M. P. Goetz. Assessing the impact of real-time serial circulating tumor cell results on the management of patients with metastatic breast cancer [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 PS4-03-10.

Abstract Background Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) differs from invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) in its estrogen receptor (ER) signaling pathways, response to systemic therapy, and imaging features. We evaluated differences in early change in the proliferation marker Ki67 and features on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after novel endocrine based neoadjuvant therapy in lobular versus non-lobular cases on the I-SPY2 EOP Trial. Methods EOP is a prospective, randomized NET trial enriched for patients with ILC. Patients with stage II-III ER positive HER2 negative breast cancer with low molecular risk (Mammaprint low or Mammaprint Hi1 plus high Sensitivity to Endocrine therapy Index) were randomized to one of several endocrine therapy-based arms. Treatment arms include novel oral SERDS with or without CDK4/6 inhibitor, aromatase inhibitors, and SERMs with or without ovarian function suppression in pre-menopausal patients. Patients undergo repeat core needle biopsy with central Ki67 assessment after 3 weeks of treatment and serial breast MRI. Here, we compare endocrine therapy responsiveness as measured by change in Ki67 at 3 weeks and functional tumor volume (FTV) on pre-surgical MRI in lobular versus non-lobular cases. Results We evaluated 253 patients of whom 148 (58.5%) had non-lobular cancer (93.9% IDC), and 105 (41.5%) had lobular cancer (17.1% mixed ILC/IDC). Overall, mean age was 53.3 years, 63.8% of tumors were grade 2, and 86.5% were Mammaprint (MP) Low with the remaining being Hi1, with higher rates of MP Low in the lobular versus non-lobular cohorts (92.4% versus 83.4%, p=0.0358). At baseline, tumors in the lobular cohort had significantly lower mean Ki67 than those in the non-lobular cohort (11.2% [SD 12.8] versus 16.4% [SD 14.4%], p=0.0038). Consistent with this, the proportion with baseline tumor Ki67 <10% was significantly higher in the lobular cohort than the ductal cohort (60.4% versus 39.3%, p=0.001). At 3-week biopsy, mean Ki67 remained lower in the lobular versus non-lobular group (3.4% versus 5.4%, respectively, p=0.0415). The proportion of patients with Ki67 <10% at 3 weeks did not differ significantly between lobular and non-lobular cases (88.6% versus 79.7%, respectively, p=0.08). Among the 40 lobular cases and 88 non-lobular cases with baseline Ki67 ≥10%, week 3 Ki67 decreased to <10% in 90% of lobular cases and 72.7% of non-lobular cases (p=0.07). On MRI, mean FTV at baseline was similar among lobular and non-lobular cases (21 cc3 versus 16.3 cc3). On pre-surgical MRI, patients in the lobular cohort had significantly higher mean residual FTV than those in the non-lobular cohort (5.7 cc3 versus 3.8 cc3, p=0.034). Interestingly, when splitting the lobular cohort into mixed lobular and pure lobular, mean residual MRI FTV was 7.5 cc3 in mixed cases and 3.8 cc3 in pure lobular cases, reflecting that FTV decreased the least in mixed lobular cases (decrease of 51.1% in mixed cases, 69.7% in pure lobular cases, and 73.9% in non-lobular cases, p=0.0255). Conclusions These results highlight differences in lobular versus non-lobular breast cancer. Lobular cases had lower baseline Ki67, and similar rates of decrease in Ki67 after 3 weeks of NET than non-lobular cases. Despite this, mean FTV after completion of 6 months of NET was higher in lobular tumors. These findings may reflect differences in early versus late indicators of response to NET, or differential response patterns by histology. Alternatively, standard response measures such as Ki67 and FTV may need lobular-specific modifications. Ongoing work includes central assessment of Ki67 from surgical specimens, analysis of changes in gene expression signatures, and evaluation of surgical outcomes such as breast conservation rates by histologic subtype. Citation Format: R. Mukhtar, P. Norwood, A. Borowsky, S. Alkhafaji, K. Giridhar, C. Vaklavas, A. Elias, M. Wei, M. Goetz, N. Onishi, O. Olopade, L. Van 't Veer, L. Huppert, W. F. Symmans, L. Brown Swigart, C. Wu, C. Yau, D. Yee, M. Magbanua, E. Price, N. Hylton, L. Esserman, J. Chien. Differential early response to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy in lobular versus non-lobular breast cancer on the Endocrine Optimization Pilot (EOP) of the I-SPY2 Trial [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 PS4-02-01.

Abstract Background: Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in HER2+ and triple-negative breast cancer (BC) are prognostic and associated with therapy response; however, there are few data regarding distribution and significance of TIL values in ER+ HER2-negative (HER2-) MBC patients (pts) treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i). CDK4/6 inhibition may promote antitumor immunity by production of type III interferons and tumor antigen presentation, and by inhibition of regulatory T cells (Goel, Nature 2017). Further, the addition of immune checkpoint therapy to palbociclib numerically prolonged PFS in the 2nd line (2L) setting (Mayer, JCO 2024). We aimed to investigate the prognostic role of TILs derived from fresh metastatic tumor biopsies in pts with ER+HER2- MBC prior to starting CDK4/6i and endocrine therapy (ET) in the first line (1L) and 2L setting. Methods: PROMISE (NCT0281902) is a multicenter, prospective study that enrolled women commencing the CDK4/6i palbociclib (Pb) with letrozole (1L) or fulvestrant (2L) for HR+HER2- MBC. The primary goal was to identify novel genomic variants and pathways associated with PFS. Here, we performed a secondary analysis to quantitate stromal TILs using protocol mandated pretreatment tumor biopsies and determine their association with PFS. Using the Kaplan-Meier method, we reported median PFS (mPFS) and 3-year PFS percentage (%) (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) by TILs [≥20% vs <20%] separately within 1L and 2L. As sample TIL values were generally concentrated at zero (27/58 = 46.6%), coupled with wide spread of sample TIL values ≥20% [range: 20%- 80%], we applied a ≥20% threshold for PFS analysis (high vs low TIL group) as described by Luen, Salgado et al. Lancet Oncol 2017. Statistical significance was based on the Wilcoxon test of the null hypothesis that there was no difference in the PFS curves by TILs. PFS is reported at median follow-up of 21 months. Results: Pretreatment tumor biopsies from 58/68 (85.3 %) pts were evaluable (42 in 1L and 16 in 2L). Median [Q1, Q2] TIL values were higher in 1L (5% [0, 10]) vs 2L (0% [0, 15]). The most common biopsy sites were bone (44.8%), lymph node (17.2%), liver (17.2%) and breast (12%). Overall, TILs frequency (>20%) by the 4 most common biopsy sites were bone (2/20, 10%), lymph node (4/7, 57%), liver (2/6, 33%), and breast (1/7, 14%). In 1L, although PFS was not significantly different (P = 0.237), mPFS (44 vs 34 months) and 3-year PFS 75.0%, [95% CI: 50.3%, 100%] vs 46.4% [95% CI: 31.0%, 69.5%]) were longer in pts with high versus low TILS, respectively. In 2L, the 3-year PFS was numerically similar comparing high and low TILs groups, (25.0%, [95% CI: 4.6%, 100%] vs 22.5% [95% CI: 6.7%, 76.1%]) with no significant difference in PFS (P = 0.761). Conclusions: In pts with ER+HER2- MBC treated with Pb and ET, PFS was numerically longer comparing high vs low TIL values in 1L but not 2L settings. Future studies evaluating TILs in larger datasets are needed to validate these findings. Genomic analysis (DNA/RNA) and its association with TIL levels is underway and will be presented at the meeting. Funding: The Center for Individualized Medicine, Mayo Clinic; Mayo Clinic Breast Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE P50CA116201); Mayo Clinic Cancer Center (CA15083-40A2); TEMPUS (https://www.tempus.com/) and Conquer Cancer Foundation of ASCO (Career Development Award 2018, Dr. O’Sullivan) Citation Format: C. C. O'Sullivan, A. M. Moyer, A. Nassar, D. M. Zahrieh, V. Suman, X. Tang, K. J. Thompson, R. C. Hentz, J. J. Harrington, A. Moreno-Aspitia, D. W. Northfelt, T. C. Haddad, S. Chumsri, P. P. Peethambaram, K. J. Ruddy, K. V. Giridhar, R. A. Leon-Ferre, R. Weinshilboum, L. Wang, K. R. Kalari, M. P. Goetz. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in advanced ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer prior to treatment with palbociclib and endocrine therapy: a retrospective analysis of the PROMISE study [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 PS1-10-22.

Abstract Background: TheTAILORx trial established that adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) is non-inferiorto chemotherapy plus ET (CET) in T1-2N0 HR+/HER2-negative early breast cancer(EBC) with an Oncotype DX (ODX) 21-gene recurrence score (RS) of 11-25, RS 0-10is associated with low distant recurrence (DR) rates with ET alone, and RS26-100 is associated with higher DR rates despite CET. Although ODX isprognostic for 10-year DR, it has limited value for late DR >5 years. Inorder to develop improved DR risk prognostication, we developed multimodal AImodels integrating clinical, molecular, and histopathology features to provideprognostic information for early (<5years), late (>5 years), and overall DR at 15 years using primary tumorsamples and clinical data from volunteers who participated in TAILORx. Methods: DigitizedH&E slides were generated and nucleic acids extracted and sequenced from∼5000 primary tumor samples using Caris MI Tumor Seek-Hybrid, of which 2,808(56%) were used for model training and 5-fold nested cross validation (60/20/20split). Models included single-modality (clinical [C], image [I], molecular [M:ODX genes]), dual-modality (CM, IC), and multimodal (ICM). An expandedmolecular model (M+) model was also derived from expanded molecular inputsderived from whole transcriptome sequencing (WTS) data, including 5 commercialgene signatures (ODX, MammaPrint, Prosigna, EndoPredict, BCI) and 57 high-variancegenes; only EndoPredict, BCI, and ODX gene signatures were retained for model M+.Model-CM+ combined clinical plus expanded molecular features, while ICM/ICM+integrated image, clinical, and (expanded) molecular inputs. Risk scores were dichotomized into high vs. low risk groups usingthresholds chosen to yield risk group proportions closely matching thosedefined by the ODX RS cutoff of 25 for distinguishing high vs. low genomicrisk. Theprimary endpoint was distant recurrence (DR). Prognostic performance wasassessed using truncated concordance index (C-index, 90th percentile of eventtimes), hazard ratios (HRs), and log-rank tests. DNA-level whole exomesequencing (WES) features were also tested but did not provide additionalprognostic information and thus excluded from final models. Results: Theactual ODX continuous RS achieved a C-index of 0.625 for overall DR and 0.743early DR, but no prognostic value for late DR (0.52). Similar results for theC-index were observed for ODX+C for overall DR (0.619), early DR (0.724), andlate DR (0.514). Of all modelsevaluated, model-ICM+ gave the best overall prognostic accuracy for overall DR (C-index0.713; hazard ratio [HR] 3.56 for comparison of high vs. low risk, p<0.001)and late DR (C-index 0.655; HR 2.36, p<0.001), and ranked second for earlyDR (C-index 0.772; HR 6.59, p<0.001) behind the CM+ model (C-index 0.782). Amongsingle-modality models, Model-M+ improved early DR prognostication comparedwith a molecular model including only ODX genes(C-index 0.767 vs 0.744 for M),whereas Model-I was strongest for late DR prognostication (C-index 0.635). Conclusions: Molecularfeatures primarily drove prognostic accuracy for early DR within 5 years,whereas histopathology features strengthened the prognostic accuracy for lateDR after 5 years. Multimodal models captured these complementary signals, withICM+ giving the best overall accuracy for individualized prognostic assessment.Additional validation of the optimized ICM+ model and other models is beingperformed in an intendent validation sample of 2000 TAILORx volunteers, withresults to be presented at the meeting.Supported by the Breast CancerResearch Foundation and the U.S. NIH/NCI U10CA180820 and 5U24CA196172, and theU.S. Postal Service Breast Cancer Stamp Fund. Citation Format: J. A. Sparano, V. Wang, R. J. Gray, D. F. Makower, K. S. Albain, D. F. Hayes, C. E. Geyer, E. C. Dees, M. P. Goetz, J. A. Olson, S. S. Badve, T. J. Saphner, T. J. Whelan, M. Radovich, V. G. Kaklamani, G. W. Sledge. Multimodal artificial intelligence (AI) models integrating image, clinical, and molecular data for predicting early and late breast cancer recurrence in TAILORx [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 GS1-08.

Importance Molecular analyses of biospecimens collected from study participants are essential for identifying biomarkers that can tailor treatments to specific subsets of patients who are most likely to benefit. Sharing of data and biospecimens from clinical trials enables personalized, patient-centric use of cancer therapies and accelerates the development of new treatments. Objective To describe obstacles to sharing data and biospecimens and to propose strategies to enhance access and collaboration. Evidence Review This is a Special Communication authored by 53 academic investigators and patient representatives from the breast cancer community with extensive experience in conducting clinical and translational research. The article also evaluates the impact of biomarker research on specifying responsive subpopulations in the 29 registrational clinical trials that have led to approval of a new drug for treatment of breast cancer between 2017 and 2024. Findings Clinical trial participants are increasingly asked to provide tissue and/or body fluid biospecimens for biomarker research that is typically controlled by the sponsoring pharmaceutical company, but published biomarker studies are rare. Among 29 breast cancer registrational studies reported in the past 8 years, none resulted in biomarker research that restricted a drug’s approved indication. Herein, strategies to maximize the value of clinical data and biospecimens contributed by participants are proposed, thereby supporting the shared goals of the pharmaceutical industry and academia to improve patient care. These strategies include (1) establishing coleadership structures involving academia and patients in clinical trial design and conduct, (2) ensuring that informed consent forms state that data and biospecimens will be shared with academia for future research, (3) requiring the sharing of clinical data as a condition for regulatory approval, and (4) enabling access to biospecimens and translational research data for independent studies on biomarkers that may indicate drug efficacy and toxicity. Conclusions and Relevance Data and biospecimen sharing from registrational trials has been suboptimal. Improving clinical data, biospecimens, and biospecimens’ related data sharing requires concrete actions and a multidimensional stakeholder approach to accelerate the impact of clinical cancer research on the quality of patient care.

The treatment landscape of invasive early-stage and metastatic breast cancer is evolving constantly. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates included in the most recent version (version 5.2025) of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer specific to workup, locoregional therapy, surveillance, and systemic neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy recommendations for invasive, nonmetastatic breast cancer.

Importance The Breast Cancer Index (BCI) previously identified premenopausal patients with tumors in which the ratio of expression of HOXB13 relative to IL17BR (hereafter, BCI [H/I]–low tumors) as likely to derive greatest benefit from ovarian function suppression (OFS)–containing adjuvant therapy in the Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial (SOFT) trial. Objectives To assess BCI as a predictive biomarker of benefit from exemestane plus OFS vs tamoxifen plus OFS and to validate BCI as a prognostic biomarker for premenopausal patients. Design, Setting, and Participants This prognostic study used a prospective-retrospective translational design within the Tamoxifen and Exemestane (TEXT) and SOFT trials (enrolled November 2003 to April 2011). Blinded BCI testing in all available tumor samples was completed in March 2024. Premenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer randomized to tamoxifen plus OFS or exemestane plus OFS who had BCI assessed were included. Analysis occurred from March to August 2024. Exposure 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen plus OFS or exemestane plus OFS. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcomes were breast cancer-free interval (BCFI) for predictive analyses and distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) for prognostic analyses after a median follow-up of 13 years in the TEXT cohort. Secondary objectives examined the predictive performance of BCI (H/I) in the combined TEXT and SOFT cohort overall and in prespecified clinical subgroups. Results Of 1782 patients in the TEXT study, 1034 (58.0%) had BCI (H/I)–low tumors; 915 (51.3%) of patients had N0 disease and 1077 (60.4%) were younger than 45 years. Patients with BCI (H/I)–low tumors had a 6.6% absolute benefit in 12-year BCFI (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44-0.85) for exemestane plus OFS vs tamoxifen plus OFS, while those with BCI (H/I)–high tumors had a 6.3% absolute benefit (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.57-1.07; P for interaction = .29). Results were consistent in the combined TEXT plus SOFT cohort (2896 patients) and adjusting for clinicopathological variables. Clinical subgroup analyses consistently showed benefit of exemestane plus OFS vs tamoxifen plus OFS for BCI (H/I)–low tumors, and more variable relative treatment effects among BCI (H/I)–high tumors, including by age. Post hoc exploratory time-varying estimates suggested the treatment × BCI associations may differ in years 0 to 5 vs greater than 5 years. BCI and BCI N+ as continuous indices were prognostic for distant recurrence in N0 (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.11-1.44; P < .001) and N1 (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.21-2.05; P < .001) cancers. The 12-year DRFI was 96.3%, 90.3%, and 84.9% for BCI low-, intermediate-, and high-risk N0 cancers, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance In this study of premenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer, BCI (H/I) status did not clearly predict greater benefit of adjuvant exemestane plus OFS vs tamoxifen plus OFS for women with BCI (H/I)–low tumors than for those with BCI (H/I)–high tumors; BCI continuous indices were reconfirmed as prognostic for premenopausal women. These findings support prior results of SOFT, which compared tamoxifen-alone vs OFS with either exemestane or tamoxifen, indicating premenopausal patients with BCI (H/I)–low tumors may benefit from more intensive endocrine therapy.

Abstract Purpose :Tamoxifen undergoes bioactivation to its active metabolite (Z)-endoxifen, which blocks estrogen-dependent breast tumor growth at high potency. We tested the feasibility and safety of supplementing standard tamoxifen therapy with low-dose (Z)-endoxifen in patients with breast cancer with compromised tamoxifen bioactivation. Patients and Methods :We conducted a prospective, interventional, three group randomized trial including 235 patients with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer who received standard tamoxifen therapy (20 mg/day). Patients were stratified by CYP2D6 genotype (n = 78), defining poor, intermediate, and normal metabolizers, or by baseline (Z)-endoxifen plasma concentration (n = 78), defining ≤15, 15 to 25, and ≥25 nmol/L. Co-treatment with (Z)-endoxifen 3 and 1.5 mg/day or placebo was performed, respectively. A control group (n = 79) received placebo regardless of metabolizer phenotype. The primary endpoint was the number of patients with (Z)-endoxifen levels >32 nmol/L after 6 weeks of treatment. Adverse events were continuously monitored. Results: A higher proportion of patients in both intervention groups achieved target concentrations >32 nmol/L compared with control (P < 0.0001). At 3 mg (Z)-endoxifen supplementation, 92.3% of CYP2D6 poor metabolizer patients and all patients with baseline (Z)-endoxifen ≤15 nmol/L achieved the target concentration. At 1.5 mg (Z)-endoxifen supplementation, 88% of CYP2D6 intermediate metabolizer patients and 95% of patients with 15 to 25 nmol/L baseline (Z)-endoxifen levels achieved the target concentration. Similar proportions of patients receiving (Z)-endoxifen (6/80, 7.5%) or placebo (8/155, 5.2%) experienced grade 3 adverse events. Conclusions: Adding low-dose (Z)-endoxifen to standard tamoxifen is safe and provides a new approach to personalized antiestrogen treatment for patients with low endoxifen plasma levels.

Abstract Despite therapeutic advances, ovarian cancer (OC) recurrence remains common and outcomes for advanced disease are poor, highlighting the need for novel therapeutic targets. To this end, we identified CTPS1 as a highly expressed and essential gene for the survival of many OC cell lines, including models resistant to chemotherapy and PARP inhibitors. CTPS1 is one of two enzymes, alongside CTPS2, responsible for the de novo synthesis of cytidine triphosphate (CTP), a critical nucleotide required for DNA and phospholipid biosynthesis. We discovered that CTPS1 is the predominant isoform expressed in OC cells, with significantly higher levels of expression in advanced and resistant disease compared to normal tissue, benign lesions and treatment naïve cancers. Intriguingly, 25% of all OC samples were found to completely lack CTPS2 protein expression suggesting their near complete reliance on CTPS1 for survival. Using CTPS1 siRNAs and genetically engineered OC cells with a degradation tag (dTAG) fused to the C-terminus of endogenous CTPS1 alleles, we showed that CTPS1 knockdown or proteasomal degradation induces an S-phase cell cycle arrest followed by apoptosis. Leveraging a first-in-class, highly selective, and orally bioavailable CTPS1 inhibitor (STP938) developed by Step Pharma, we identified nanomolar-range IC50 values across a panel of over 20 OC cell lines and validated its anti-neoplastic activity in ex vivo patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models. STP938 synergized with standard-of-care chemotherapy and PARP inhibitors, even in resistant models, further supporting its clinical potential. To elucidate STP938’s mechanism of action, we performed multi-omic profiling (bulk RNAseq, phospho- and total proteomics) on sensitive and isogenic resistant OC lines, as well as single-cell RNAseq of an OC PDX tumor following in vivo treatment with vehicle or STP938, revealed dysregulation of DNA replication, cell cycle, and metabolic pathways. As expected, STP938 rapidly depleted CTP levels, which remain suppressed for 72 hours, suggesting insufficient salvage pathway compensation which ultimately compromised cancer cell viability. As CTP is also a direct precursor for activated intermediates in phospholipid biosynthesis. Mass-spectrometry based lipidomics and metabolomics were employed to interrogate the impact of STP938 in these processes where numerous changes were found. To uncover mechanisms of resistance to STP938 and reveal therapeutic vulnerabilities, we conducted genome-wide CRISPR knockout screens in multiple treatment naïve and STP938 resistant models and analysis of results are ongoing. In collaboration with Step Pharma, a Phase 1a/b clinical trial of STP938 is currently enrolling patients with advanced solid tumors, including an expansion cohort for CTPS2 null OC patients (NCT06297525). These laboratory discoveries and ongoing clinical efforts aim to enable broader uptake of this novel therapeutic approach to improve long-term outcomes in patients with CTPS1-dependent disease. Citation Format: Xiyin Wang, Michael J. Emch, Lauren A. Voll, Rebecca Epp, Esther P. Rodman, Noa Odell, Nicole A. Pearson, Xiaonan Hou, Matthew P. Goetz, Scott H. Kaufmann, S. John Weroha, Philip Beer, John R. Hawse. Exploiting CTPS1 dependency for the treatment of ovarian cancerPR005: Exploiting CTPS1 dependency for the treatment of ovarian cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference in Cancer Research: Advances in Ovarian Cancer Research; 2025 Sep 19-21; Denver, CO. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(18_Suppl):Abstract nr PR005.