Suman, Vera J.

Abstract The OmicsFootPrint framework addresses the need for advanced multi-omics data analysis methodologies by transforming data into intuitive two-dimensional circular images and facilitating the interpretation of complex diseases. Utilizing deep neural networks and incorporating the SHapley Additive exPlanations algorithm, the framework enhances model interpretability. Tested with The Cancer Genome Atlas data, OmicsFootPrint effectively classified lung and breast cancer subtypes, achieving high area under the curve (AUC) scores—0.98 ± 0.02 for lung cancer subtype differentiation and 0.83 ± 0.07 for breast cancer PAM50 subtypes, and successfully distinguished between invasive lobular and ductal carcinomas in breast cancer, showcasing its robustness. It also demonstrated notable performance in predicting drug responses in cancer cell lines, with a median AUC of 0.74, surpassing nine existing methods. Furthermore, its effectiveness persists even with reduced training sample sizes. OmicsFootPrint marks an enhancement in multi-omics research, offering a novel, efficient and interpretable approach that contributes to a deeper understanding of disease mechanisms.

1037 Background: TBCRC041, a randomized phase 2 trial of alisertib (A) ± fulvestrant (F) in women with HR+/HER2- MBC demonstrated promising clinical activity for alisertib (1). Interrogation of baseline (PreC1) and end of cycle 1 (EOC1) cfDNA and CTCs may identify biomarkers associated with response to A±F. Methods: Plasma cfDNA was sequenced using the Guardant INFINITY platform, which includes genomic and methylated tumor fraction (mTF) analysis. Pathogenic variants were determined using publicly available databases and Mayo Clinic annotation pipelines. CTCs were identified as nucleated, EpCAM+/ cytokeratin+/ CD45- cells and assessed for ER/HER2 staining (RareCyte, Seattle). PFS was defined as the time from randomization to progression or death. EOC1-PFS differs from PFS as time starts at C2D1. Stratified log-rank tests and conditional Cox modeling were used to assess whether PFS or EOC1-PFS differed by mutations in ESR1 or PIK3CA, pre-CTC ≥ 5, or mTF>1%. Results: Of the 91 eligible pts, 84 progressed, and 73 were deceased. In the 86 pts with PreC1-cfDNA results, variants were identified in ESR1 (42; 48.8%), PIK3CA (36; 41.9%), AKT1 (7; 8.1%), PTEN(7; 8.1%), BRCA1 (4; 4.7%), and BRCA2 (7; 8.1%). Pts with a PIK3CAmut had significantly decreased PFS (HR 1.8; 95%CI: 1.1 -2.9, p=0.014) but not by ESR1mut status (p=0.583). PreC1 and EOC1-mTF were determined for 78 and 76 pts, respectively. PreC1-mTF was 0-1% in 21; 1.1-10.0% in 27; and 10.1-100% in 30. mTF levels remained between 0-1% in 17 pts fell to 0-1% in 11 pts, and was 0-1% in 5 pts without a preC1-mTF determination. PFS did not differ with respect to PreC1-mTF (p=0.210), but EOC1-PFS was worse in pts with mTF >1% (HR 3.0; 95%CI: 1.6 -5.2, p<0.001). PreC1 and EOC1-CTC were determined for 78 and 76 pts. 36 (46.2%) pts had a PreC1 CTC count ≥ 5. EOC1-CTC levels remained at (n=17) or increased to (n=1) ≥ 5 and was ≥ 5 in 2 pts without a preC1-CTC determination. EOC1-PFS was not significantly different for EOC1-CTC ≥ 5 (p=0.065), but was significantly decreased in pts with PreC1-CTC≥5 (HR=1.8; 95%CI: 1.1-3.0; p=0.018). Broader cfDNA NGS panel and CTC-derived ER/HER2 staining results will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: Among patients receiving A±F, PFS varied based on the PIK3CAmutation status. cfDNA and CTC assessment PreC1 and EOC1 provided complementary information. Further validation in larger datasets is needed. 1. JAMA Oncol 2023;9:815. Clinical trial information: NCT02860000 .

Abstract Purpose: We previously reported that postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-α–positive breast cancer receiving adjuvant anastrozole 1 mg/day (ANA1) with estrone (E1) ≥1.3 pg/mL and estradiol (E2) ≥0.5 pg/mL [inadequate estrogen suppression (IES)] had a threefold increased risk of a breast cancer event. The objective of this study was to determine if increasing anastrozole to 10 mg/day (ANA10) could result in adequate estrogen suppression (AES: E1 &lt;1.3 pg/mL and/or E2 &lt;0.5 pg/mL) among those with IES on ANA1. Patients and Methods: Postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-α–positive breast cancer planning to receive adjuvant ANA1 were eligible. E1 and E2 were assessed pre- and post-8 to 10 weeks of ANA1. Those with IES were switched to 8- to 10-week cycles of ANA10 followed by letrozole 2.5 mg/day. E1 and E2 were assessed after each cycle. Anastrozole concentrations were measured post-ANA1 and post-ANA10. Primary analyses included patients who documented taking at least 80% of the planned treatment (adherent cohort). Results: In total, 132 (84.6%) of 156 eligible patients were ANA1 adherent. IES occurred in 40 (30.3%) adherent patients. Twenty-five (78.1%) of 32 patients who began ANA10 were adherent, and AES was achieved in 19 (76.0%; 90% confidence interval, 58.1%–89.0%) patients. Anastrozole concentrations post-ANA1 and post-ANA10 did not differ by estrogen suppression status among adherent patients. AES was maintained/attained in 21 (91.3%) of 23 letrozole-adherent patients. Conclusions: Approximately 30% of ANA1-adherent patients had IES. Among those who switched to ANA10 and were adherent, 76% had AES. Further studies are required to validate emerging data that ANA1 results in IES for some patients and to determine the clinical benefit of switching to ANA10 or an alternative aromatase inhibitor.

Abstract Background: Ovarian function suppression (OFS) combined with tamoxifen (TAM) or an aromatase inhibitor (AI) is standard for premenopausal (PM) ER+, HER2- breast cancer (BC). However, &gt; 40% PM patients (pts) are intolerant of OFS. For these pts, TAM is the only FDA approved option. In the neoadjuvant endocrine setting, pts with endocrine sensitive disease (ESD) (Ki-67 ≤ 10% at 4 weeks) have 5yr dDFS &gt; 97%; however, only 45% of TAM pts vs &gt;75% with AI+OFS achieve 4 wk ESD (Nitz JCO 2022). (Z)-endoxifen (ENDX) is a potent anti-estrogen superior to TAM and AI in xenograft models and with antitumor activity in endocrine-resistant postmenopausal pts. ENDX additionally targets protein kinase C beta 1 (PKCβ1) at concentrations &gt;500 ng/mL, resulting in AKT inhibition and apoptosis (Jayaraman npj Breast Cancer 2023). We hypothesize that ENDX dual targeting of ERα and PKCβ1 will obviate the need for OFS and be non-inferior to AI plus OFS for PM pts with ER+/HER2- BC. Methods: EVANGELINE (NCT05607004) is an ongoing phase 2 multicenter neoadjuvant study with pharmacokinetic (PK) run-in assessing ENDX in PM women with ER+/HER2- BC. The primary objective for the PK run-in is to identify a dose (40 or 80 mg/day) resulting in ENDX steady state concentrations (Css) of 500-1000 ng/mL (to target both ERα and PKCβ1) without significant toxicity. Following PK run-in, the randomized phase II goal is to assess whether the ESD rate with ENDX is non-inferior to exemestane plus goserelin. Women with ESD at wk4 continue treatment for 24 weeks followed by surgery. Here we report the results from the 40 mg/day PK run-in. Results: Seven PM women (6 White, 1 Asian) aged 28-51 (median 46) received ENDX 40 mg/day. Pt characteristics on study were: ER &gt; 90% (all pts), median Ki-67 = 13 (range 4-33%), cTstage (cT2: 6 pts, cT3: 1 pt), and tumor grade (G1: 1 pt, G2: 6 pts). The median ENDX 28 day Css (ng/mL) was 263.6 (range 180.3-376.6). One pt discontinued due to wk4 Ki-67 remaining &gt; 10%. The remaining 6 had ESD, with either wk4 Ki-67 remaining ≤ 10% (3 pts) or decreasing to ≤ 10% (3 pts) and after 24 wks underwent surgery with surgical Ki-67 ≤ 3% (range 0-3%). MRI central review (wk12 and wk24) demonstrated target lesion decreases in all pts with 1 CR, 1 PR and 4 SD (RECIST). Treatment related toxicities included grade 3 headache (n=1), grade 2 amenorrhea (n=1), and grade 2 hot flashes (n=1). The median (range) baseline estrone (n=5) was 54 pg/mL (19-114) with median (range) fold increase from baseline of 9.0 (1.3-23.2) at wk4 and 4.7 (0.4 - 25.9) at wk24. The median baseline estradiol level (n=5) was 29 pg/mL (19-209) with median fold increases from baseline of 17.9 (0.4-57.0) at wk4 and 8.1 (0.04 - 56.6) at wk24. Additional surgical and blood biomarker data will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: ENDX (40 mg/day) exhibits promising antitumor activity for PM ER+/HER2- BC but with ENDX Css below target. Enrollment is ongoing to the 80 mg/day dose level. Citation Format: Matthew P. Goetz, Vera J. Suman, Heather Fraser, Lida Mina, Pooja Advani, Roberto Leon-Ferre, Karthik Giridhar, Felipe Batalini, Katie N. Hunt, Swaathi Jayaraman, James Jakub, Patricia Cronin, Mara Piltin, Amy Degnim, James N. Ingle, Judy C. Boughey, Sarah Buhrow, Joel Reid, Matthew Schellenberg, John Hawse, Steven Quay. Neoadjuvant (Z)-endoxifen in premenopausal ER+, HER2- breast cancer: Evaluation of the first pharmacokinetic cohort of the EVANGELINE trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 2 (Late-Breaking, Clinical Trial, and Invited Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(7_Suppl):Abstract nr CT205.

Importance The association of tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) abundance in breast cancer tissue with cancer recurrence and death in patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) who are not treated with adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy is unclear. Objective To study the association of TIL abundance in breast cancer tissue with survival among patients with early-stage TNBC who were treated with locoregional therapy but no chemotherapy. Design, Setting, and Participants Retrospective pooled analysis of individual patient-level data from 13 participating centers in North America (Rochester, Minnesota; Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada), Europe (Paris, Lyon, and Villejuif, France; Amsterdam and Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Milan, Padova, and Genova, Italy; Gothenburg, Sweden), and Asia (Tokyo, Japan; Seoul, Korea), including 1966 participants diagnosed with TNBC between 1979 and 2017 (with follow-up until September 27, 2021) who received treatment with surgery with or without radiotherapy but no adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Exposure TIL abundance in breast tissue from resected primary tumors. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was invasive disease-free survival [iDFS]. Secondary outcomes were recurrence-free survival [RFS], survival free of distant recurrence [distant RFS, DRFS], and overall survival. Associations were assessed using a multivariable Cox model stratified by participating center. Results This study included 1966 patients with TNBC (median age, 56 years [IQR, 39-71]; 55% had stage I TNBC). The median TIL level was 15% (IQR, 5%-40%). Four-hundred seventeen (21%) had a TIL level of 50% or more (median age, 41 years [IQR, 36-63]), and 1300 (66%) had a TIL level of less than 30% (median age, 59 years [IQR, 41-72]). Five-year DRFS for stage I TNBC was 94% (95% CI, 91%-96%) for patients with a TIL level of 50% or more, compared with 78% (95% CI, 75%-80%) for those with a TIL level of less than 30%; 5-year overall survival was 95% (95% CI, 92%-97%) for patients with a TIL level of 50% or more, compared with 82% (95% CI, 79%-84%) for those with a TIL level of less than 30%. At a median follow-up of 18 years, and after adjusting for age, tumor size, nodal status, histological grade, and receipt of radiotherapy, each 10% higher TIL increment was associated independently with improved iDFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92 [0.89-0.94]), RFS (HR, 0.90 [0.87-0.92]), DRFS (HR, 0.87 [0.84-0.90]), and overall survival (0.88 [0.85-0.91]) (likelihood ratio test, P &amp;lt; 10e-6). Conclusions and Relevance In patients with early-stage TNBC who did not undergo adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, breast cancer tissue with a higher abundance of TIL levels was associated with significantly better survival. These results suggest that breast tissue TIL abundance is a prognostic factor for patients with early-stage TNBC.

Abstract Purpose: AB160 is a 160-nm nano-immunoconjugate consisting of nab-paclitaxel (ABX) nanoparticles noncovalently coated with bevacizumab (BEV) for targeted delivery into tissues expressing high levels of VEGF. Preclinical data showed that AB160 resulted in greater tumor targeting and tumor inhibition compared with sequential treatment with ABX then BEV. Given individual drug activity, we investigated the safety and toxicity of AB160 in patients with gynecologic cancers. Patients and Methods: A 3+3 phase I trial was conducted with three potential dose levels in patients with previously treated endometrial, cervical, and platinum-resistant ovarian cancer to ascertain the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). AB160 was administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle (ABX 75–175 mg/m2, BEV 30–70 mg/m2). Pharmacokinetic analyses were performed. Results: No dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were seen among the three dose levels tested. Grade 3/4 toxicities included neutropenia, thromboembolic events, and leukopenia. DL2 (ABX 150 mg/m2, BEV 60 mg/m2) was chosen as the RP2D. Seven of the 19 patients with measurable disease (36.8%) had confirmed partial responses (95% confidence interval, 16.3%–61.6%). Pharmacokinetic analyses demonstrated that AB160 allowed 50% higher paclitaxel dosing and that paclitaxel clearance mirrored that of therapeutic antibodies. Conclusions: The safety profile and clinical activity of AB160 supports further clinical testing in patients with gynecologic cancers; the RP2D is DL2 (ABX 150 mg/m2, BEV 60 mg/m2).

Importance Adding fulvestrant to anastrozole (A+F) improved survival in postmenopausal women with advanced estrogen receptor (ER)–positive/ERBB2 (formerly HER2)–negative breast cancer. However, the combination has not been tested in early-stage disease. Objective To determine whether neoadjuvant fulvestrant or A+F increases the rate of pathologic complete response or ypT1-2N0/N1mic/Ki67 2.7% or less residual disease (referred to as endocrine-sensitive disease) over anastrozole alone. Design, Setting, and Participants A phase 3 randomized clinical trial assessing differences in clinical and correlative outcomes between each of the fulvestrant-containing arms and the anastrozole arm. Postmenopausal women with clinical stage II to III, ER-rich (Allred score 6-8 or &amp;gt;66%)/ERBB2-negative breast cancer were included. All analyses were based on data frozen on March 2, 2023. Interventions Patients received anastrozole, fulvestrant, or a combination for 6 months preoperatively. Tumor Ki67 was assessed at week 4 and optionally at week 12, and if greater than 10% at either time point, the patient switched to neoadjuvant chemotherapy or immediate surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the endocrine-sensitive disease rate (ESDR). A secondary outcome was the percentage change in Ki67 after 4 weeks of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) (week 4 Ki67 suppression). Results Between February 2014 and November 2018, 1362 female patients (mean [SD] age, 65.0 [8.2] years) were enrolled. Among the 1298 evaluable patients, ESDRs were 18.7% (95% CI, 15.1%-22.7%), 22.8% (95% CI, 18.9%-27.1%), and 20.5% (95% CI, 16.8%-24.6%) with anastrozole, fulvestrant, and A+F, respectively. Compared to anastrozole, neither fulvestrant-containing regimen significantly improved ESDR or week 4 Ki67 suppression. The rate of week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10% was 25.1%, 24.2%, and 15.7% with anastrozole, fulvestrant, and A+F, respectively. Pathologic complete response/residual cancer burden class I occurred in 8 of 167 patients and 17 of 167 patients, respectively (15.0%; 95% CI, 9.9%-21.3%), after switching to neoadjuvant chemotherapy due to week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10%. PAM50 subtyping derived from RNA sequencing of baseline biopsies available for 753 patients (58%) identified 394 luminal A, 304 luminal B, and 55 nonluminal tumors. A+F led to a greater week 4 Ki67 suppression than anastrozole alone in luminal B tumors (median [IQR], −90.4% [−95.2 to −81.9%] vs −76.7% [−89.0 to −55.6%]; P &amp;lt; .001), but not luminal A tumors. Thirty-six nonluminal tumors (65.5%) had a week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10%. Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial, neither fulvestrant nor A+F significantly improved the 6-month ESDR over anastrozole in ER-rich/ERBB2-negative breast cancer. Aromatase inhibition remains the standard-of-care NET. Differential NET response by PAM50 subtype in exploratory analyses warrants further investigation. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01953588

Introduction: Preclinical studies have suggested synergism between lenalidomide (LEN) and ibrutinib (IBR) in multiple myeloma (MM). Both downregulate IRF4, a master transcriptional factor that regulates myeloma cell survival. Single agent oral IBR combined with dexamethasone proved well tolerated and active in advanced, steroid refractory relapsed MM as part of a large Phase1/2 study in 60 patients, with durable stabilization and minimal response seen in most evaluable patients (Richardson PG et al, BJH 2018). LEN is considered a standard of care in newly diagnosed MM, as maintenance and in relapsed disease, and a backbone of oral therapy in the MM treatment paradigm (Laubach JP et al, Leukemia 2016). Methods: We therefore conducted a 3+3 phase I trial to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of IBR in combination with LEN + dexamethasone (DEX) in patients with relapsed/refractory (RR) MM who had at least 2 prior lines of therapy. Three dose levels (DL) were planned. Cycle length was 28 days. IBR was administered orally daily at 560mg on DL1-2 and 840mg on DL3, LEN orally days 1-21 at 15mg on DL1 and 25mg on DL2-3, and DEX orally days 1, 8, 15, and 22 at 40 mg if age &lt; 75 or 20 mg if ≥75 for DL1-3. Patients with GFR ≥ 30 and &lt; 60 were treated according to manufacturer's instructions with lenalidomide dosed at 10mg/d. Dose limiting toxicities (DLT) included grade 4 thrombocytopenia; grade 4 neutropenia lasting more than 5 days or febrile neutropenia; grade 4 nausea, vomiting or diarrhea; grade 3 thrombocytopenia with bleeding or platelet transfusion; grade 3-4 hyperglycemia or thrombotic/embolic event, treatment delays ≥ 21 days for toxicity; and treatment related death. Due to changes in standard of care during the study, eligibility was modified to allow the enrollment of patients with RRMM who had at least 1 prior line of therapy. Response was assessed using IMWG/Uniform Criteria. Results: Fourteen patients (DL1-6 pts; DL2-3 pts; DL3-5 pts) registered to the study from March 2019 to May 2023, prior to its closure due to slow accrual. One patient on DL3 cancelled participation prior to start of treatment due to disease progression (PD). The remaining 13 patients are included in summary of toxicities and response but 2 patients on DL3 are excluded from determination of MTD due to discontinuing cycle 1 treatment due to COVID and receiving 280 mg/day of IBR instead of assigned 840 mg/day dose during cycle 1, respectfully. Twelve patients were evaluable for response. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (range: 2-9), reflecting a heavily pretreated relapsed and refractory population. One of the 6 patient on DL1 developed a DLT, grade 3 non-viral hepatitis. None of the 3 patients on DL2 or the 2 patients on DL3 had a DLT. One patient on DL1 remains on treatment with stable disease for 42+ cycles. The median number of cycles administered was 3 (range: 1-42+). Severe toxicities reported included grade 3 lymphocytopenia (3), anemia (2), alanine aminotransferase increase (1), aspartate aminotransferase increase (1), blood bilirubin increase (1), hypocalcemia (1), hypokalemia (1) hypophosphatemia (1), febrile neutropenia (1), chronic kidney disease (1), non-viral hepatitis (1), soft tissue infection (1), and fatigue (1); grade 4 lymphocytopenia (1), and grade 5 sepsis (1). End of treatment reasons included: PD (7), toxicity (2), death [soft tissue infection that turned into sepsis considered to be likely related to DEX] (1), and concomitant conditions (2). Stable disease (SD) or better was achieved in 10 of 12 evaluable patients (83%), including one patient who achieved disease control for over 3.5 years. One patient (8%) on DL3 had a complete response (CR) but stopped treatment after 2 cycles due to reversible toxicity and comorbid conditions, based upon physician advice and patient choice. Conclusions: The combination of lenalidomide with Ibrutinib as an all-oral approach in RR MM proved feasible and generally tolerable, with the majority of discontinuation seen in this Phase I study due to disease progression. No COVID related - mortality was seen. SD or better was achieved in 83% of patients, including one CR. Potential future directions include combination approaches with next generation IMids such as pomalidomide, as well as other orally bioavailable novel agents with potent immune activating properties, such as CelMoDs. Support: AFT; Pharmacyclics; Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03702725

TPS633 Background: Ovarian function suppression (OFS) when combined with tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor is the standard of care for premenopausal estrogen receptor positive (ER+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer (BC) based on SOFT (Francis 2022) and TEXT (Pagani 2022) clinical trials and confirmed in a metanalysis (EBCTCG 2022). However, estrogen deprivation in premenopausal women is associated with significant morbidity and up to 40% of premenopausal women with ER+/HER2- BC are intolerant of OFS. For these women, tamoxifen monotherapy is the only FDA approved option. Therefore, there is substantial room to improve endocrine therapy for premenopausal women with ER+/HER2- BC. (Z)-endoxifen is one of the most active anti-estrogen tamoxifen metabolites, with preclinical data demonstrating superiority to tamoxifen and letrozole in aromatase expressing xenograft models and evidence for antitumor activity in early phase clinical trials in patients with prior progression on endocrine therapy including tamoxifen. In addition to its ability to potently block ERa, (Z)-endoxifen at clinically achievable concentrations inhibits protein kinase C beta 1 (PKCβ1), resulting in downstream AKT inhibition and apoptosis. It is hypothesized that (Z)-endoxifen, when delivered as monotherapy at doses that dually target both ERα and PKCβ1, will potently inhibit BC proliferation while obviating the need for OFS in premenopausal women. If successful, this innovative approach could spare women with endocrine sensitive BC from the side effects of OFS. Methods: To further study (Z)-endoxifen in premenopausal women, a multicenter study in the United States, with possible expansion to other countries was designed (EVANGELINE; NCT05607004). This is a Phase 2, open-label, randomized, neoadjuvant study in premenopausal women with Stage IIA or IIB ER+/HER2- BC. Subjects are randomized 1:1 to either exemestane plus goserelin or (Z)-endoxifen. The primary objective is to determine whether the endocrine sensitive disease (ESD) rate (defined as Ki-67 ≤ 10% after 4 weeks of neoadjuvant therapy) with (Z)-endoxifen is non-inferior to exemestane plus goserelin. Subjects will be enrolled with the intent of surgical treatment in the involved breast(s) after completing 6 months of neoadjuvant treatment. Safety, tolerability, response rates and surgical outcomes will be assessed. Disease progression will be monitored throughout study participation. Paired tumor biopsies and blood sampling will allow for a robust biomarker evaluation. Prior to initiating the Treatment Cohort (162 subjects), up to 12 subjects will be enrolled in a pharmacokinetic (PK) Run-in Cohort to identify the optimal dose for the Treatment Cohort. Enrolment in the PK Run-in cohort began in February 2023. Clinical trial information: NCT05607004 .

ImportanceAurora A kinase (AURKA) activation, related in part to AURKA amplification and variants, is associated with downregulation of estrogen receptor (ER) α expression, endocrine resistance, and implicated in cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK 4/6i) resistance. Alisertib, a selective AURKA inhibitor, upregulates ERα and restores endocrine sensitivity in preclinical metastatic breast cancer (MBC) models. The safety and preliminary efficacy of alisertib was demonstrated in early-phase trials; however, its activity in CDK 4/6i–resistant MBC is unknown.ObjectiveTo assess the effect of adding fulvestrant to alisertib on objective tumor response rates (ORRs) in endocrine-resistant MBC.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis phase 2 randomized clinical trial was conducted through the Translational Breast Cancer Research Consortium, which enrolled participants from July 2017 to November 2019. Postmenopausal women with endocrine-resistant, ERBB2 (formerly HER2)–negative MBC who were previously treated with fulvestrant were eligible. Stratification factors included prior treatment with CDK 4/6i, baseline metastatic tumor ERα level measurement (&amp;lt;10%, ≥10%), and primary or secondary endocrine resistance. Among 114 preregistered patients, 96 (84.2%) registered and 91 (79.8%) were evaluable for the primary end point. Data analysis began after January 10, 2022.InterventionsAlisertib, 50 mg, oral, daily on days 1 to 3, 8 to 10, and 15 to 17 of a 28-day cycle (arm 1) or alisertib same dose/schedule with standard-dose fulvestrant (arm 2).Main Outcomes and MeasuresImprovement in ORR in arm 2 of at least 20% greater than arm 1 when the expected ORR for arm 1 was 20%.ResultsAll 91 evaluable patients (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [11.3] years; 1 American Indian/Alaskan Native [1.1%], 2 Asian [2.2%], 6 Black/African American [6.6%], 5 Hispanic [5.5%], and 79 [86.8%] White individuals; arm 1, 46 [50.5%]; arm 2, 45 [49.5%]) had received prior treatment with CDK 4/6i. The ORR was 19.6%; (90% CI, 10.6%-31.7%) for arm 1 and 20.0% (90% CI, 10.9%-32.3%) for arm 2. In arm 1, the 24-week clinical benefit rate and median progression-free survival time were 41.3% (90% CI, 29.0%-54.5%) and 5.6 months (95% CI, 3.9-10.0), respectively, and in arm 2 they were 28.9% (90% CI, 18.0%-42.0%) and 5.4 months (95% CI, 3.9-7.8), respectively. The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events attributed to alisertib were neutropenia (41.8%) and anemia (13.2%). Reasons for discontinuing treatment were disease progression (arm 1, 38 [82.6%]; arm 2, 31 [68.9%]) and toxic effects or refusal (arm 1, 5 [10.9%]; arm 2, 12 [26.7%]).Conclusions and RelevanceThis randomized clinical trial found that adding fulvestrant to treatment with alisertib did not increase ORR or PFS; however, promising clinical activity was observed with alisertib monotherapy among patients with endocrine-resistant and CDK 4/6i–resistant MBC. The overall safety profile was tolerable.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02860000