Bose, Ron

348 Background: Patients (pts) with mUC have few treatment options beyond the second-line setting. HER2 gene amplification has been reported in a minority of pts with UC, but there have been anecdotal reports of the activity of HER2-targeted agents. MyPathway is a multi-basket study evaluating the efficacy and safety of targeted therapies in non-indicated tumor types harboring relevant molecular alterations. We present preliminary data for pts with HER2-positive mUC receiving HER2-targeted treatment with pertuzumab + trastuzumab. Methods: MyPathway (NCT02091141) is an open-label, multicenter, phase IIA study. Pts in this subset analysis had refractory mUC with HER2 amplification or putative activating mutations by gene sequencing, FISH, or IHC. Pts received standard doses of pertuzumab + trastuzumab without chemotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint is investigator-assessed overall response rate (RECIST v1.1). Results: As of July 31, 2016, 12 pts with platinum-resistant HER2-positive mUC (HER2-amplified, n=9; HER2-mutated, n=3) have been enrolled. At a median follow-up of 5.4 (range 0.9–14.5) mos, 1 pt had complete response (CR, ongoing at 12.5 mos), 2 had partial responses (PR; duration of response, 3.7 and 5.5 mos), and 2 had stable disease (SD) for >4 mos (Table). Safety was consistent with the product labels. Conclusions: Preliminary results indicate that the combination of pertuzumab + trastuzumab has activity in previously treated HER2-amplified mUC, including a durable CR in a pt with peritoneal metastases. Accrual to MyPathway is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02091141. [Table: see text]

653 Background: Next-generation sequencing often reveals potentially actionable molecular alterations; however, data on approved targeted therapies in non-indicated tumors are limited. MyPathway (NCT02091141) evaluates agents targeting the HER2, EGFR, BRAF, or Hedgehog (Hh) pathways in tumors for which these therapies are not currently indicated. Here, we present early response data for patients with GI tumors. Methods: Eligible patients had metastatic tumors with potentially actionable genomic alterations, identified by a CLIA-certified lab, and progression on standard therapy. Based on the identified alteration, patients received standard doses of trastuzumab + pertuzumab (HER2), erlotinib (EGFR), vemurafenib (BRAF), or vismodegib (Hh). Response was evaluated by the investigator using RECIST v1.1. Results: As of Aug 21, 2015, 96 patients had enrolled, 36 of whom (38%) had GI tumors with the following alterations: HER2 (n=28 [22 amplifications, 5 activating mutations, 1 both]), BRAF (n=4), Hh (n=2 [2 PTCH-1 mutations]), and EGFR (n=2). Patients had a median of 4 (range, 1–8) prior lines of therapy. Tumor types and interim best response data are shown below. Among all evaluable patients with GI tumors (n=26), 5 have had a PR to targeted therapy (duration 3–10+ months). Conclusions: Targetable molecular alterations were found in a variety of GI tumors, resulting in clinical benefit from targeted treatments that would not have otherwise been realized. These early results support this molecular testing strategy. Accrual to the trial continues; based on activity observed, the HER2-positive colorectal cancer cohort will be expanded to ≥30 patients. Additional data will be presented at the meeting. Clinical trial information: NCT02091141. [Table: see text]

BACKGROUND Activating, nonamplification ERBB2 mutations ( ERBB2 mut) are not detected by immunohistochemistry (IHC) or fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), but are detected by DNA sequencing and may predict clinical responses to human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2)‐targeted therapy. The authors queried 5605 advanced/metastatic breast cancers (mBC) to uncover the frequency of ERBB2 mut genomic alterations. Clinical responses to anti‐HER2 therapeutics were identified. METHODS DNA was extracted from 40 µm of formalin‐fixed paraffin‐embedded (FFPE) sections. Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) was used to evaluate up to 315 genes (592× mean coverage depth). Results were analyzed for base substitutions, short indels, copy number changes, and selected rearrangements. RESULTS Of 5605 cases, 698 (12.5%) featured ERBB2 alterations, including 596 (10.6%) ERBB2 amplifications ( ERBB2 amp) and 138 (2.4%) ERBB2 mut; 38 cases (0.7%) had co‐occurring ERBB2amp and ERBB2mut. ERBB2mut predominantly affected the kinase (124 cases; 90%) or extracellular (15 cases; 11%) domains. Both primary BC (52 cases; 38%) and metastatic site biopsies (86 cases; 62%) were found to harbor ERBB2 mut, which were distributed across carcinoma not otherwise specified (NOS) (69 cases; 50%), invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) (40 cases; 29%), invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) (27 cases; 20%), and mucinous mBC (2 cases; 1%). Genes commonly coaltered with ERBB2 were tumor protein 53 ( TP53 ) (49%); phosphatidylinositol 3‐kinase catalytic subunit alpha ( PIK3CA ) (42%); cadherin 1, type 1 ( CDH1 ) (37%); MYC (17%); and cyclin D1 protein ( CCND1 ) (16%). CDH1 mutations were enriched in ERBB2 mut mBC ( P <0.0006) and associated with recurrent mBC. Selected patients with ERBB2 mut, without ERBB2 amp, who responded to anti‐HER2 targeted therapies are presented herein. CONCLUSIONS Within this large series, 1.8% of cases harbored ERBB2 mut, which are undetectable by standard‐of‐care IHC or FISH tests. Metastatic BC driven by ERBB2 mut respond to anti‐HER2 targeted therapies, and expanding clinical trials designed to detect ERBB2 mut by CGP and optimize targeted treatments are warranted. Cancer 2016 . © 2016 American Cancer Society . Cancer 2016;122:2654–2662. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Abstract Background: Although the spectrum of genomic alterations in primary, treatment-naïve breast tumors has been described, the genomic landscape of HER2+ MBC remains underexplored. Furthermore, tumor genomic alterations that arise after progression on anti-HER2 therapy are largely unknown. Methods: We prospectively collected metastatic tumor biopsies from patients (pts) enrolled on TBCRC003 (NCT00470704), a phase II study evaluating the combination of lapatinib (L) and T in pts with HER2+ MBC who had varying degrees of prior T exposure. We performed WES on baseline metastatic biopsies and normal DNA from 57 pts. In 36 pts, we also performed WES on pre-treatment primary tumors. Tumors were analyzed for point mutations, insertions/deletions, and copy number alterations. Results: Total accrual was 116 pts. 87 pts were registered in one of two efficacy cohorts: Cohort 1 included pts w no prior T for MBC. Pts with prior adjuvant T were included if the interval from last T to 1st recurrence &gt; 12 months. Cohort 2 included pts with 1-2 prior lines of T for MBC or recurrence within 12 months of adjuvant T. An additional 29 pts were enrolled in a biomarker cohort (Cohort 3). Per-protocol efficacy analyses for 85 pts deemed evaluable are shown below: Objective Response RateClinical Benefit RateMedian Time to ProgressionCohort 150% (90% CI 33.8-66.2%)57.5% (95% CI 40.9-73.0)7.4 monthsCohort 222.2% (90% CI 11.2-37.1%)42.2% (95% CI 27.7-57.8)5.3 months As we previously reported (Wagle et al, ASCO 2014), across 57 metastatic tumors, significant recurrently mutated genes were TP53 (n=30; 53%) and PIK3CA (n=19; 33%). The frequency of mutant TP53 and PIK3CA was not significantly different from 119 primary, treatment-naïve HER2+ tumors sequenced in the TCGA study (50%, p=0.8 and 27%, p=0.5, respectively). Recurrent copy number alterations were also similar to TCGA data. Comparing the 38 pts who received any prior T with the 19 pts who did not, there was no significant difference in the incidence of mutant TP53 (53% vs 53%, p=1.0) and PIK3CA (37% vs 26%, p=0.6). We identified mutations in the HER2 kinase domain in 4/38 pts who received prior T (11%), as compared to 0/19 T-naïve pts. HER2 kinase domain mutations have been identified in ∼2% of HER2-negative cancers but &lt;1% of primary HER2+ cancers. 3 of the mutations were L755S, which has been shown to be resistant to L and sensitive to irreversible HER2 inhibitors. The 4th mutation was D742N, a novel kinase domain mutation. None of the 4 pts with HER2 kinase domain mutations had an objective response, though 1 pt had stable disease for 29 weeks. An analysis comparing paired archival primary tumors and baseline metastatic biopsies from 36 pts to identify genomic alterations acquired or enriched in the metastatic tumors will be presented. Conclusions: We present an analysis of the genomic landscape of HER2+ MBC, including comparisons between matched primary tumors and metastatic biopsies. Somatic HER2 kinase mutations in pts with HER2+ MBC treated with prior T suggests that these mutations may be involved in resistance to T, and may predict poor response to additional anti-HER2 therapy with combined L and T. Novel therapeutic approaches may be required for these pts. Citation Format: Nikhil Wagle, Nancy U Lin, Andrea L Richardson, Ignaty Leshchiner, Ingrid A Mayer, Andres Forero-Torres, Timothy J Hobday, Elizabeth C Dees, Rita Nanda, Mothaffar F Rimawi, Hao Guo, William T Barry, Ron Bose, Wei Shen, Antonio C Wolff, Stacey B Gabriel, Levi A Garraway, Eric P Winer, Ian E Krop. Whole exome sequencing (WES) of HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC) from patients with or without prior trastuzumab (T): A correlative analysis of TBCRC003 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PD3-5.

Abstract Background: Estrogen receptors are over-expressed in around 70% of breast cancer cases. The genetic changes that occur during aromatase inhibitor (AI) treatment are not well understood and may differ depending upon the patient's response phenotype. Methods: We performed whole genome sequencing (WGS) of matched blood, pre-treatment, and post-treatment biopsy samples from 22 estrogen receptor positive breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitors. For 5 cases, we performed the whole genome sequencing (WGS) on patients’ matched normal, two pre AI-treatment, and two post AI-treatment DNA isolates from biopsy samples. We validated all putative coding and non-coding somatic mutations using deep sequencing. By comparing the validated somatic mutations from pre- and post- AI treatment biopsy samples, we were able to determine the alterations in the tumor genomes. In every case we defined the clonal architecture of each pair of pre-treatment and post-treatment biopsy samples by comparing the variant allele frequencies from thousands of validated somatic mutations. Results: Comparisons of the two pre AI-treatment biopsy samples from the same patient indicates that the variant allele frequencies of mutations showed high concordances in all 5 cases, 0.74 to 0.95 range of correlation coefficient. Only a small percentage of somatic mutations were detected in one pre-treatment sample and not the other (4.65% overall). In comparing the somatic variations between pre-treatment and matched post-treatment biopsy samples in 22 cases, we found that patients with good clinical response to AI treatment retained known driver mutations only in their pre-treatment tumors. Conversely, those patients with poor clinical response presented new driver mutations in their post-treatment samples. Furthermore, the variant allele frequency for most mutated genes decreased in post AI treatment samples for patients with good AI treatment response; on the contrary, the variant allele frequency increased for patients with poor clinical response. Conclusions: From WGS of matched normal, pre-treatment, and post-treatment biopsy samples, we identified new driver genes mutated in patients with poor clinical response, while patients with good clinical response had lost mutated driver genes in their post-treatment biopsy samples. The genetic landscape revealed by WGS of pre-treatment and post-treatment biopsy samples reveals mutational repertoires are remodeled by AI therapy. This finding suggests deep sequencing of AI treated samples will be necessary to reveal the complete complement of mutations present in a patient's tumor. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 103rd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2012 Mar 31-Apr 4; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2012;72(8 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-423. doi:1538-7445.AM2012-LB-423