Ellis, Matthew J

PURPOSE ASCO/College of American Pathologists guidelines recommend reporting estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) as positive with (1%-100%) staining. Statistically standardized quantitated positivity could indicate differential associations of positivity with breast cancer outcomes. METHODS MA.27 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00066573 ) was a phase III adjuvant trial of exemestane versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. Immunochemistry ER and PgR HSCORE and % positivity (%+) were centrally assessed by machine image quantitation and statistically standardized to mean 0 and standard deviation (SD) 1 after Box-Cox variance stabilization transformations of square for ER; for PgR, (1) natural logarithm (0.1 added to 0 HSCOREs and 0%+) and (2) square root. Our primary end point was MA.27 distant disease-free survival (DDFS) at a median 4.1-year follow-up, and secondary end point was event-free survival (EFS). Univariate survival with cut points at SDs about a mean of 0 (≤–1; (–1, 0]; (0, 1]; >1) was described with Kaplan-Meier plots and examined with Wilcoxon (Peto-Prentice) test statistic. Adjusted Cox multivariable regressions had two-sided Wald tests and nominal significance P < .05. RESULTS Of 7,576 women accrued, 3,048 women's tumors had machine-quantitated image analysis results: 2,900 (95%) for ER, 2,726 (89%) for PgR, and 2,582 (85% of 3,048) with both ER and PgR. Higher statistically standardized ER and PgR HSCORE and %+ were associated with better univariate DDFS and EFS ( P < .001). In multivariable assessments, ER HSCORE and %+ were not significantly associated ( P = .52-.88) with DDFS in models with PgR, whereas higher PgR HSCORE and %+ were significantly associated with better DDFS ( P = .001) in models with ER. CONCLUSION Adjunctive statistical standardization differentiated quantitated levels of ER and PgR. Patients with higher ER- and PgR-standardized units had superior DDFS compared with those with HSCOREs and %+ ≤–1.

Abstract Endocrine therapies (ET) with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibition are the standard treatment for estrogen receptor-α-positive (ER+) breast cancer, however drug resistance is common. In this study, proteogenomic analyses of patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) from patients with 22 ER+ breast cancer demonstrated that protein kinase, membrane-associated tyrosine/threonine one (PKMYT1), a WEE1 homolog, is estradiol (E2) regulated in E2-dependent PDXs and constitutively expressed when growth is E2-independent. In clinical samples, high PKMYT1 mRNA levels associated with resistance to both ET and CDK4/6 inhibition. The PKMYT1 inhibitor lunresertib (RP-6306) with gemcitabine selectively and synergistically reduced the viability of ET and palbociclib-resistant ER+ breast cancer cells without functional p53. In vitro the combination increased DNA damage and apoptosis. In palbociclib-resistant, TP53 mutant PDX-derived organoids and PDXs, RP-6306 with low-dose gemcitabine induced greater tumor volume reduction compared to treatment with either single agent. Our study demonstrates the clinical potential of RP-6306 in combination with gemcitabine for ET and CDK4/6 inhibitor resistant TP53 mutant ER+ breast cancer.

Abstract Purpose: To evaluate prediction of response and event-free survival (EFS) following neoadjuvant endocrine therapy by SET2,3 index of nonproliferation gene expression related to estrogen and progesterone receptors adjusted for baseline prognosis. Experimental Design: A correlative study was conducted of SET2,3 measured from gene expression profiles of diagnostic tumor (Agilent microarrays) in 379 women with cStage II–III breast cancer from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z1031 neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor trial SET2,3 was dichotomized using the previously published cutoff. Fisher exact test was used to assess the association between SET2,3 and low proliferation at week 2–4 [Ki67 ≤ 10% or complete cell-cycle arrest (CCCA; Ki67 ≤ 2.7%)] and PEPI-0 rate in cohort B, and the association between SET2,3 and ypStage 0/I in all patients. Cox models were used to assess EFS with respect to SET2,3 excluding cohort B patients who switched to chemotherapy. Results: Patients with high SET2,3 had higher rate of pharmacodynamic response than patients with low SET2,3 (Ki67 ≤ 10% in 88.2% vs. 56.9%, P &lt; 0.0001; CCCA in 50.0% vs. 26.2%, P = 0.0054), but rate of ypStage 0/I (24.0% vs. 20.4%, P = 0.4580) or PEPI = 0 (28.4% vs. 20.6%, P = 0.3419) was not different. Patients with high SET2,3 had longer EFS than patients with low SET2,3 (HR, 0.52, 95% confidence interval: 0.34–0.80; P = 0.0026). Conclusions: This exploratory analysis of Z1031 data demonstrated a higher rate of pharmacodynamic suppression of proliferation and longer EFS in high SET2,3 disease relative to low SET2,3 disease. The ypStage 0/I rate and PEPI = 0 rate were similar with respect to SET2,3.

Abstract Purpose: HER2 mutations (HER2mut) induce endocrine resistance in estrogen receptor–positive (ER+) breast cancer. Patients and Methods: In this single-arm multi-cohort phase II trial, we evaluated the efficacy of neratinib plus fulvestrant in patients with ER+/HER2mut, HER2 non-amplified metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in the fulvestrant-treated (n = 24) or fulvestrant-naïve cohort (n = 11). Patients with ER-negative (ER−)/HER2mut MBC received neratinib monotherapy in an exploratory ER− cohort (n = 5). Results: The clinical benefit rate [CBR (95% confidence interval)] was 38% (18%–62%), 30% (7%–65%), and 25% (1%–81%) in the fulvestrant-treated, fulvestrant-naïve, and ER− cohorts, respectively. Adding trastuzumab at progression in 5 patients resulted in three partial responses and one stable disease ≥24 weeks. CBR appeared positively associated with lobular histology and negatively associated with HER2 L755 alterations. Acquired HER2mut were detected in 5 of 23 patients at progression. Conclusions: Neratinib and fulvestrant are active for ER+/HER2mut MBC. Our data support further evaluation of dual HER2 blockade for the treatment of HER2mut MBC.

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) reduce breast cancer recurrence and prolong survival, but up to 30% of patients exhibit recurrence. Using a genome-wide association study of patients entered on MA.27, a phase III randomized trial of anastrozole versus exemestane, we identified a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in CUB And Sushi multiple domains 1 ( CSMD1) associated with breast cancer–free interval, with the variant allele associated with fewer distant recurrences. Mechanistically, CSMD1 regulates CYP19 expression in an SNP- and drug-dependent fashion, and this regulation is different among 3 AIs: anastrozole, exemestane, and letrozole. Overexpression of CSMD1 sensitized AI-resistant cells to anastrozole but not to the other 2 AIs. The SNP in CSMD1 that was associated with increased CSMD1 and CYP19 expression levels increased anastrozole sensitivity, but not letrozole or exemestane sensitivity. Anastrozole degrades estrogen receptor α (ERα), especially in the presence of estradiol (E2). ER + breast cancer organoids and AI- or fulvestrant-resistant breast cancer cells were more sensitive to anastrozole plus E2 than to AI alone. Our findings suggest that the CSMD1 SNP might help to predict AI response, and anastrozole plus E2 serves as a potential new therapeutic strategy for patients with AI- or fulvestrant-resistant breast cancers.

Abstract Purpose: To determine if the degree of estrogen suppression with aromatase inhibitors (AI: anastrozole, exemestane, letrozole) is associated with efficacy in early-stage breast cancer, and to examine for differences in the mechanism of action between the three AIs. Experimental Design: Matched case–control studies [247 matched sets from MA.27 (anastrozole vs. exemestane) and PreFace (letrozole) trials] were undertaken to assess whether estrone (E1) or estradiol (E2) concentrations after 6 months of adjuvant therapy were associated with risk of an early breast cancer event (EBCE). Preclinical laboratory studies included luciferase activity, cell proliferation, radio-labeled ligand estrogen receptor binding, surface plasmon resonance ligand receptor binding, and nuclear magnetic resonance assays. Results: Women with E1 ≥1.3 pg/mL and E2 ≥0.5 pg/mL after 6 months of AI treatment had a 2.2-fold increase in risk (P = 0.0005) of an EBCE, and in the anastrozole subgroup, the increase in risk of an EBCE was 3.0-fold (P = 0.001). Preclinical laboratory studies examined mechanisms of action in addition to aromatase inhibition and showed that only anastrozole could directly bind to estrogen receptor α (ERα), activate estrogen response element-dependent transcription, and stimulate growth of an aromatase-deficient CYP19A1−/− T47D breast cancer cell line. Conclusions: This matched case–control clinical study revealed that levels of estrone and estradiol above identified thresholds after 6 months of adjuvant anastrozole treatment were associated with increased risk of an EBCE. Preclinical laboratory studies revealed that anastrozole, but not exemestane or letrozole, is a ligand for ERα. These findings represent potential steps towards individualized anastrozole therapy.