Punturi, Nindo

Abstract RNA sequencing detects estrogen receptor alpha gene (ESR1) fusion transcripts in estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer but their role in disease pathogenesis remains unclear. Herein we examined multiple in-frame and out-of-frame ESR1 fusions and found only two, both identified in advanced endocrine treatment resistant disease, encoded stable and functional in-frame fusion proteins. In both examples, ESR1-e6>YAP1 and ESR1-e6>PCDH11X, the N-terminal, DNA binding and dimerization motifs encoded by exons 2-6 were fused to C-terminal sequences from the partner gene. Functional properties included estrogen-independent growth, constitutive expression of ER target genes, anti-estrogen resistance, induction of cellular motility in vitro and the development of lung metastasis in vivo. Chromatin immunoprecipitation and RNA sequencing experiments showed both fusions uniquely activated a metastasis-associated transcriptional program. ESR1-e6>YAP1 and ESR1-e6>PCDH11X-induced growth remained sensitive to a CDK4/6 inhibitor, palbociclib, and a patient-derived xenograft (PDX) expressing the ESR1-e6>YAP1 fusion was also responsive. Transcriptionally active ESR1 fusions therefore trigger both endocrine therapy resistance and metastatic progression explaining the association with fatal disease progression, although CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment is predicted to be effective. Citation Format: Jonathan T. Lei, Jieya Shao, Jin Zhang, Michael Iglesia, Doug W. Chan, Jin Cao, Meenakshi Anurag, Purba Singh, Xiaping He, Yoshimasa Kosaka, Ryoichi Matsunuma, Robert Crowder, Jeremy Hoog, Chanpheng Phommaly, Rodrigo Goncalves, Susana Romalho, Raquel M. Peres, Nindo Punturi, Cheryl Schmidt, Alex Bartram, Eric Jou, W V. Lai, Oliver Hampton, Anna Rogers, Ethan Tobias, Poojan Parikh, Sherri R. Davies, Shunqiang Li, Cynthia X. Ma, Vera Suman, Kelly K. Hunt, Mark A. Watson, Katherine A. Hoadley, E A. Thompson, Xi Chen, Shyam M. Kavuri, Chad J. Creighton, Christopher A. Maher, Charles M. Perou, Svasti Haricharan, Matthew J. Ellis. Functional and therapeutic significance of ESR1 gene fusions in breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 5240.

Abstract Estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer is treated with endocrine therapy but intrinsic resistance occurs in ˜1/3 of patients and acquired resistance in ˜1/5 of the remainder. While many resistance mechanisms have been explored, clinical trials testing associated therapeutics have had mixed outcomes. Understanding mechanisms of resistance and finding therapeutic strategies to target them, therefore, remain important challenges. In this study we discover an intriguing link between mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency, specifically of the MutL complex (MLH1/3, PMS1/2), and endocrine therapy resistance in ER+ disease. We find a direct role for MutL loss in inducing endocrine therapy resistance in vitro and in vivo by knocking down multiple MutL genes using CRISPR and stable shRNA approaches validated using standard rescue experiments. We identify the underlying mechanism: MutL deficiency in ER+ breast cancer abrogates Chk2-mediated feedback inhibition of CDK4/6 that appears necessary for endocrine therapy responsiveness. Consequently, pharmacological targeting of CDK4/6 in vitro and in vivo significantly inhibits growth of endocrine therapy resistant MutL-deficient ER+ breast cancer cells. These results are corroborated by data from a neoadjuvant clinical trial demonstrating that cell cycle regulation of MutL-mutant tumors is estrogen-independent but CDK4/6 dependent. The results of this study provide important biological and clinically relevant insights. 1) a novel role for MMR in endocrine therapy resistance 2) A mechanism underlying the effectiveness of CDK4/6 inhibitors in some de novo endocrine therapy resistant tumors. While there are currently no biomarkers to guide the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors for ER+ breast cancer, markers of MMR dysregulation could identify patients in whom CDK4/6 inhibition may, most effectively, prevent disease recurrence. Citation Format: Haricharan S, Punturi N, Singh P, Holloway KR, Anurag M, Schmelz J, Schmidt C, Lei JT, Suman V, Hunt K, Olson Jr JA, Hoog J, Li S, Huang S, Edwards DP, Kavuri SM, Bainbridge MN, Ma CX, Ellis MJ. Loss of mismatch repair predicts resistance to endocrine therapy and sensitivity to CDK4/6 inhibitors in ER+ breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-04-01.

Abstract Significant endocrine therapy–resistant tumor proliferation is present in ≥20% of estrogen receptor–positive (ER+) primary breast cancers and is associated with disease recurrence and death. Here, we uncover a link between intrinsic endocrine therapy resistance and dysregulation of the MutL mismatch repair (MMR) complex (MLH1/3, PMS1/2), and demonstrate a direct role for MutL complex loss in resistance to all classes of endocrine therapy. We find that MutL deficiency in ER+ breast cancer abrogates CHK2-mediated inhibition of CDK4, a prerequisite for endocrine therapy responsiveness. Consequently, CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) remain effective in MutL-defective ER+ breast cancer cells. These observations are supported by data from a clinical trial where a CDK4/6i was found to strongly inhibit aromatase inhibitor–resistant proliferation of MutL-defective tumors. These data suggest that diagnostic markers of MutL deficiency could be used to direct adjuvant CDK4/6i to a population of patients with breast cancer who exhibit marked resistance to the current standard of care. Significance: MutL deficiency in a subset of ER+ primary tumors explains why CDK4/6 inhibition is effective against some de novo endocrine therapy–resistant tumors. Therefore, markers of MutL dysregulation could guide CDK4/6 inhibitor use in the adjuvant setting, where the risk benefit ratio for untargeted therapeutic intervention is narrow. Cancer Discov; 7(10); 1168–83. ©2017 AACR. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1047