Citations

Abstract Background: The tamoxifen (TAM) metabolite, ENDX, demonstrated promising antitumor activity in endocrine resistant breast cancer (BC) in both phase I and phase II settings. Furthermore, ENDX resulted in superior in vivo antitumor activity compared to TAM and letrozole in aromatase-expressing aromatase inhibitor-sensitive and resistant MCF7AC1 models. Recently, we identified protein kinase C beta 1 (PKCβ1), which regulates cell proliferation and tumorigenic transformation, as a novel target of ENDX. ENDX-bound PKCβ1 at concentrations achieved in phase I/II ENDX studies (100-300 nM). In contrast, TAM binding to PKCβ1 occurred at concentrations 7-10 folds higher (2 μM) than achievable with TAM 20 mg/day dosing. However, the clinical relevance of targeting PKCβ1 kinase activity is unclear, since drugs that target PKCβ1 (enzastaurin) have been ineffective in BC and other solid tumors. Therefore, we sought to understand how ENDX altered PKCβ1 and to further compare and contrast ENDXs effects to that of PKCβ1 kinase inhibition in ERα+ BC. Methods: The effects of PKCβ1 silencing and ENDX treatment on gene expression was analyzed by RNAseq in MCF7AC1 cells. The impact of PKCβ1-silencing on cell cycle was evaluated by flow cytometry. Protein expression of cell cycle regulators in PKCβ1 and ENDX-treated MCF7AC1 and T47D cells were compared to TAM and enzastaurin in vitro and to letrozole, TAM or control in vivo. The effects of PKCβ1 and drugs on growth were analyzed by cell proliferation assays. PRKCB gene amplification was assessed in primary tumors using TCGA data and in metastatic tumors using whole-exome sequencing data from patients enrolled in the PROMISE study (NCT 03281902). Results: RNAseq analysis revealed E2F targets and G2M checkpoints as the top hallmark genesets significantly downregulated in both PKCβ1-silenced and ENDX-treated MCF7AC1 cells. Flow cytometry demonstrated that PKCβ1 silencing increased G1 and reduced S phases of the cell cycle. Western blot analyses of PKCβ1-silenced MCF7AC1 and T47D cells displayed reduced protein levels of the cell cycle regulators Cyclin D1, Retinoblastoma (Rb), phospho-RbS807/811, CDK4, Chk1 and E2F1 that regulate G1/S transition. While short term ENDX (48 hours) treatment did not alter PKCβ1 levels, prolonged in vitro ENDX treatment profoundly reduced PKCβ1 protein levels and the aforementioned cell cycle regulators, faithfully replicating PKCβ1 silencing effects. In contrast, enzastaurin had no impact on proliferation or cell cycle proteins in either model. Consistent with this finding, ENDX, but not TAM or letrozole, reduced protein levels of ERα and cell cycle regulators in vivo. Overexpression of PKCβ1 induced TAM, but not ENDX, resistance and had little impact on responsiveness to enzastaurin. While PRKCB gene amplification was uncommon in newly diagnosed ERα+/HER2- BC (5%, TCGA), PRKCB was amplified in 40% of metastatic ERα+/HER2- BC (PROMISE study). Conclusion: We have confirmed the relevance of a new ENDX target, PKCβ1, in ERα+/HER2- BC. While targeting PKCβ1 kinase activity elicited no anticancer effects in ERα+ cells, PKCβ1 downregulation, either by siRNA or ENDX, resulted in profound ERα turnover, reduced protein levels of essential cell cycle mediators and profoundly inhibited cell proliferation. Furthermore, PKCβ1 protein expression is associated with TAM, but not ENDX, resistance, a finding whose clinical relevance is further magnified by identification of PRKCB amplification in metastatic ERα+ BC, confirming its potential importance in progression. Efforts are currently underway to elucidate the mechanistic basis for ENDX-induced PKCβ1 and ERα degradation and the contribution of these effects to the superior antitumor activity of ENDX in ERα+ BC. Citation Format: Swaathi Jayaraman, Mary J Kuffel, Krishna R Kalari, Kevin J Thompson, Xiaojia Tang, Vera J Suman, Elizabeth S Bruinsma, Ciara C O'Sullivan, Liewei Wang, Richard Weinshilboum, James N Ingle, John R Hawse, Matthew P Goetz. Antitumor activity of Z-endoxifen (ENDX) is mediated via PKCβ1-dependent ERα loss and cell cycle arrest in ERα-positive breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD8-04.

Abstract Background: In ER+ breast cancer (BC) models, Aurora A kinase (AURKA) activation is associated with expansion of CD44+/CD24low/- tumor initiating cells, down-regulation of ERα, and endocrine therapy resistance. Alisertib, a selective AURKA inhibitor, can restore ERα expression and endocrine sensitivity. Early phase studies evaluating alisertib alone or with fulvestrant for ER+ metastatic BC (MBC) demonstrated a favorable safety profile and promising antitumor activity [Haddad, Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018]. A phase II trial was conducted to determine if the addition of fulvestrant to alisertib improved objective response rate (ORR) and to assess clinical activity of alisertib alone or with fulvestrant in patients (pts) with prior fulvestrant and CDK 4/6 inhibitor (CDK 4/6i). Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to Arm A, alisertib (50 mg PO BID Days 1-3, 8-10, 15-17 q 28 days) or Arm B, alisertib with fulvestrant (500 mg IM Day 1, 15 for Cycle 1 and q 28 days thereafter). Eligibility included postmenopausal women, history of ER+ BC, prior fulvestrant, ≤ 2 prior chemotherapy lines, and measurable disease. Stratification factors included prior CDK4/6i, ER level (<10%, ≥10%), and primary/secondary endocrine resistance. Pts on Arm A could cross over to Arm B at progression. With 45 pts per arm, a one sided alpha=0.15 sequential binomial test would have an 85% chance of detecting an increase of ≥ 20% in the ORR of ArmB when the true ORR for Arm A is ≤ 20%. ORR was defined as a partial response (PR) + complete response (CR) by RECIST v.1.1 criteria. Secondary endpoints include progression free survival (PFS), 24-week clinical benefit rate (CBR = CR + PR + absence of progression for> 6 cycles), overall survival, duration of response (DoR), and safety. Blood and tumor specimens were collected at baseline, end of Cycle 1, and progression. Results: Pts enrolled July 2017 - November 2019 with 118 pre-registered, 96 registered, and 90 evaluable for the primary endpoint (Arm A: 45, Arm B: 45). Median age was 60 (range 33, 85). Nearly all received prior fulvestrant (n=89, 98.9%), aromatase inhibitor (n=83, 92.2%), and CDK4/6i (n=88, 97.8%). Most had secondary endocrine resistance (n=71, 78.9%). Pre-registration biopsy for ER was positive in 84 pts (86.7%) and negative in 6 pts (13.3%). More pts on Arm B had prior everolimus (A: 35.6%, B: 57.8%) and prior chemotherapy (A: 44.4%, B: 55.6%) for MBC. The ORR for alisertib and fulvestrant was 20.0% (90% CI: 10.9-32.3%), not significantly greater than alisertib alone 17.8% (90% CI: 9.2-29.8%). The 24-week CBR for Arm A was 42.2% (90% CI: 29.7-55.6%; n=19, including 7 PR) and Arm B was 31.1% (90% CI: 19.9-44.3%; n=14, including 8 PR). As of July 1, 2020, the median DoR was not reached in either arm. The median PFS time was 5.6 months (95% CI: 3.9 - 9.3) for Arm A and 5.1 months (95%CI: 3.8 - 7.6) for Arm B. Seventeen pts (18.9%) remain on treatment (A: 12, B: 5) having received at least 11 cycles (range up to 32+ cycles). At least one dose reduction was required for pts (A: 19, B: 18), most commonly due to neutropenia. The most common severe (grade ≥3) adverse events included neutropenia (n=19, 42.2% in each arm), anemia (A: 15.6%, B: 8.8%), and fatigue (n=5, 11.1% Arm B only). Pts discontinued therapy due to disease progression equally in each arm (n=28, 62.2%), however more pts on Arm B (n=12) than Arm A (n=5) discontinued therapy due to toxicity, refusal or other reasons. Conclusion: While the addition of fulvestrant to alisertib did not improve ORR, promising clinical activity with alisertib monotherapy was observed overall and notably for pts with endocrine and CDK 4/6i-resistant MBC. More severe toxicities and treatment discontinuation were observed in pts receiving combination therapy. Correlative blood (CTC/cfDNA) and tissue (AURKA, ERα, and stemness biomarkers) studies are underway. Citation Format: Tufia Haddad, Antonino D'Assoro, Vera Suman, Jodi Carter, Brendan McMenomy, Erica Mayer, Meghan Karuturi, Aki Morikawa, Paul Marcom, Claudine Isaacs, Sun Young Oh, Amy Clark, Ingrid Mayer, Khandan Keyomarsi, Roberto Leon-Ferre, Karthik Giridhar, Ciara O'Sullivan, Prema Peethambaram, Timothy Hobday, Minetta Liu, James Ingle, Matthew Goetz. Randomized phaseII trial to evaluate alisertib alone or combined with fulvestrant for advanced, endocrine-resistant breast cancer (TBCRC 041) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD2-05.

Background and ObjectivesABO blood group may affect risk of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and/or severity of COVID‐19. We sought to determine whether IgG, IgA and neutralizing antibody (nAb) to SARS‐CoV‐2 vary by ABO blood group.Materials and MethodsAmong eligible convalescent plasma donors, ABO blood group was determined via agglutination of reagent A1 and B cells, IgA and IgG were quantified using the Euroimmun anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 ELISA, and nAb titres were quantified using a microneutralization assay. Differences in titre distribution were examined by ABO blood group using non‐parametric Kruskal–Wallis tests. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) of high nAb titre (≥1:160) were estimated by blood group using multivariable modified Poisson regression models that adjusted for age, sex, hospitalization status and time since SARS‐CoV‐2 diagnosis.ResultsOf the 202 potential donors, 65 (32%) were blood group A, 39 (19%) were group B, 13 (6%) were group AB, and 85 (42%) were group O. Distribution of nAb titres significantly differed by ABO blood group, whereas there were no significant differences in anti‐spike IgA or anti‐spike IgG titres by ABO blood group. There were significantly more individuals with high nAb titre (≥1:160) among those with blood group B, compared with group O (aPR = 1·9 [95%CI = 1·1–3·3], P = 0·029). Fewer individuals had a high nAb titre among those with blood group A, compared with group B (aPR = 0·6 [95%CI = 0·4‐1·0], P = 0·053).ConclusionEligible CCP donors with blood group B may have relatively higher neutralizing antibody titres. Additional studies evaluating ABO blood groups and antibody titres that incorporate COVID‐19 severity are needed.

PURPOSE This trial assessed the utility of applying tumor DNA sequencing to treatment selection for patients with advanced, refractory cancer and somatic mutations in one of four signaling pathways by comparing the efficacy of four study regimens that were either matched to the patient's aberrant pathway (experimental arm) or not matched to that pathway (control arm). MATERIALS AND METHODS Adult patients with an actionable mutation of interest were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive either (1) a study regimen identified to target the aberrant pathway found in their tumor (veliparib with temozolomide or adavosertib with carboplatin [DNA repair pathway], everolimus [PI3K pathway], or trametinib [RAS/RAF/MEK pathway]), or (2) one of the same four regimens, but chosen from among those not targeting that pathway. RESULTS Among 49 patients treated in the experimental arm, the objective response rate was 2% (95% CI, 0% to 10.9%). One of 20 patients (5%) in the experimental trametinib cohort had a partial response. There were no responses in the other cohorts. Although patients and physicians were blinded to the sequencing and random assignment results, a higher pretreatment dropout rate was observed in the control arm (22%) compared with the experimental arm (6%; P = .038), suggesting that some patients may have had prior tumor mutation profiling performed that led to a lack of participation in the control arm. CONCLUSION Further investigation, better annotation of predictive biomarkers, and the development of more effective agents are necessary to inform treatment decisions in an era of precision cancer medicine. Increasing prevalence of tumor mutation profiling and preference for targeted therapy make it difficult to use a randomized phase II design to evaluate targeted therapy efficacy in an advanced disease setting.

PURPOSE SJMB03 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00085202 ) was a phase III risk-adapted trial that aimed to determine the frequency and clinical significance of biological variants and genetic alterations in medulloblastoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients 3-21 years old were stratified into average-risk and high-risk treatment groups based on metastatic status and extent of resection. Medulloblastomas were molecularly classified into subgroups (Wingless [WNT], Sonic Hedgehog [SHH], group 3, and group 4) and subtypes based on DNA methylation profiles and overlaid with gene mutations from next-generation sequencing. Coprimary study end points were (1) to assess the relationship between ERBB2 protein expression in tumors and progression-free survival (PFS), and (2) to estimate the frequency of mutations associated with WNT and SHH tumors. Clinical and molecular risk factors were evaluated, and the most robust were used to model new risk-classification categories. RESULTS Three hundred thirty eligible patients with medulloblastoma were enrolled. Five-year PFS was 83.2% (95% CI, 78.4 to 88.2) for average-risk patients (n = 227) and 58.7% (95% CI, 49.8 to 69.1) for high-risk patients (n = 103). No association was found between ERBB2 status and PFS in the overall cohort ( P = .74) or when patients were stratified by clinical risk ( P = .71). Mutations in CTNNB1 (96%), DDX3X (37%), and SMARCA4 (24%) were most common in WNT tumors and PTCH1 (38%), TP53 (21%), and DDX3X (19%) in SHH tumors. Methylome profiling classified 53 WNT (17.4%), 48 SHH (15.7%), 65 group 3 (21.3%), and 139 group 4 (45.6%) tumors. A comprehensive clinicomolecular risk factor analysis identified three low-risk groups (WNT, low-risk SHH, and low-risk combined groups 3 and 4) with excellent (5-year PFS > 90%) and two very high-risk groups (high-risk SHH and high-risk combined groups 3 and 4) with poor survival (5-year PFS < 60%). CONCLUSION These results establish a new risk stratification for future medulloblastoma trials.

AbstractBackgroundCalcium oxalate stones are the most common cause of nephrolithiasis in the United States. Smaller studies of <15 patients investigating ezetimibe, a selective cholesterol absorption inhibitor, have suggested increased urine oxalate levels with use of the drug. We attempt to better define this relationship of ezetimibe on urinary oxalate using a larger patient sample analysing multiple urine collections on and off treatment.Materials and MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed all consecutive patients from 01/2018 through 04/2019 evaluated for nephrolithiasis with use of ezetimibe documented in their medical record at Mayo Clinic Florida. Primary outcomes included increase in urinary oxalate with use of ezetimibe and reduction in urinary oxalate with discontinuation of medication.ResultsOf 57 reviewed patients, 30 (53%) met inclusion criteria yielding 117 24‐h urine measurements either on ezetimibe (72 measurements) or off ezetimibe (41 measurements). The mean urinary oxalate level off ezetimibe was 39.86 mg versus 40.45 mg with ezetimibe. After adjusting for age and sex, the estimated difference was 1.239 mg (95% CI, −4.856 to 7.335 mg; p = 0.93). A subset of six patients with urinary oxalate values both on and off ezetimibe showed a difference in 24‐h urinary oxalate levels ranged from −16.40 to 14.95 mg (mean difference = 0.93 mg; median difference = 3.84 mg).ConclusionUse of ezetimibe does not provide clear evidence of a difference in urinary oxalate levels.

Abstract Plasma-based biomarkers of amyloid beta (Aβ), a neuropathological hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease, show promise in predicting cognitive impairment and mapping onto cerebral amyloidosis, but little is known about how midlife plasma Aβ associates with late-life cognitive outcomes. Midlife plasma variants Aβ42 and Aβ40 were measured using a fluorimetric bead-based immunoassay in a subsample of visit 3 ARIC participants (1993-95; n=2585, mean age=59.4±5.2, 57% female, 23% African American). We investigated the relationship between midlife plasma Aβ and late-life mild cognitive impairment (MCI; n=923) and dementia (n=628) diagnosed from 2011-19. Multinomial logistic regressions estimated relative risk ratios (RRR) of MCI, dementia, and death vs normal cognitive status as a function of:(1) Aβ42:Aβ40 ratio, (2) Aβ42 and Aβ40 included as separate terms, and (3) Protected Aβ group (participants with Aβ42≥46 pg/ml and Aβ40 &lt;233 pg/ml). Adjusters included age, sex, education, site-race, and APOE4. Every doubling of midlife plasma Aβ42:Aβ40 up to a threshold of 0.20 was associated with 41% lower risk of developing MCI/dementia in comparison to cognitively normal (RRR=0.59 [95% CI:0.42, 0.82]), with no association for ratio values ≥0.20. Every standard deviation increase in plasma Aβ42 was associated with 17% lower risk of dementia (RRR=0.83 [0.70, 0.99]), whereas every standard deviation increase in plasma Aβ40 was associated with 16% higher risk of MCI (RRR=1.16 [1.02, 1.31]). The protected midlife plasma Aβ group had 86% lower risk of late-life dementia vs all others (RRR=0.14 [0.04, 0.47]). Early measurement of plasma Aβ may prove an accessible and effective population screener for future cognitive impairment.