SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Immunogenicity in Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer Receiving Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers have an increased risk of serious complications and death from SARS-CoV-2 infection. The immunogenicity of vaccines in patients with GI cancers receiving anti-cancer therapies is unclear. We conducted a prospective study to evaluate the prevalence of neutralizing antibodies in a cohort of GI cancer patients receiving chemotherapy following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between September 2020 and April 2021, patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy were enrolled. At baseline (day 0), days 28, 56, and 84, we assessed serum antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 spike (anti-S) and anti-nucleocapsid (anti-NP) and concomitantly assessed virus neutralization using a pseudovirus neutralization assay. Patients received either the Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2, or the Oxford/AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 vaccine. RESULTS: All 152 patients enrolled had a prior diagnosis of cancer; colorectal (n = 80, 52.6%), oesophagogastric (n = 38, 25.0%), and hepato pancreatic biliary (n = 22, 12.5%). Nearly all were receiving systemic anti-cancer therapy (99.3%). Of the 51 patients who did not receive a vaccination prior to, or during the study, 5 patients had detectable anti-NP antibodies. Ninety-nine patients received at least one dose of vaccine prior to, or during the study. Within 19 days following the first dose of vaccine, 30.0% had anti-S detected in serum which increased to 70.2% at days 20-39. In the 19 days following a second dose, anti-S positivity was 84.2% (32/38). However, pseudovirus neutralization titers (pVNT80) decreased from days 20 to 39. CONCLUSION: Despite the immunosuppressive effects of chemotherapy, 2 doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are able to elicit a protective immune response in patients' ongoing treatment for gastrointestinal cancers. Decreases in pseudoviral neutralization were observed after 20-39 days, re-affirming the current recommendation for vaccine booster doses. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04427280.

Impact of pharmacogenomic DPYD variant guided dosing on toxicity in patients receiving fluoropyrimidines for gastrointestinal cancers in a high-volume tertiary centre.

BACKGROUND: Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) is a key enzyme in the metabolism of fluoropyrimidines. Variations in the encoding DPYD gene are associated with severe fluoropyrimidine toxicity and up-front dose reductions are recommended. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the impact of implementing DPYD variant testing for patients with gastrointestinal cancers in routine clinical practice in a high volume cancer centre in London, United Kingdom. METHODS: Patients receiving fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy for gastrointestinal cancer prior to, and following the implementation of DPYD testing were identified retrospectively. After November 2018, patients were tested for DPYD variants c.1905+1G>A (DPYD*2A), c.2846A>T (DPYD rs67376798), c.1679T>G (DPYD*13), c.1236G>A (DPYD rs56038477), c.1601G>A (DPYD*4) prior to commencing fluoropyrimidines alone or in combination with other cytotoxics and/or radiotherapy. Patients with a DPYD heterozygous variant received an initial dose reduction of 25-50%. Toxicity by CTCAE v4.03 criteria was compared between DPYD heterozygous variant and wild type carriers. RESULTS: Between 1st December 2018 and 31st July 2019, 370 patients who were fluoropyrimidine naïve underwent a DPYD genotyping test prior to receiving a capecitabine (n = 236, 63.8%) or 5FU (n = 134, 36.2%) containing chemotherapy regimen. 33 patients (8.8%) were heterozygous DPYD variant carriers and 337 (91.2%) were wild type. The most prevalent variants were c.1601G > A (n = 16) and c.1236G > A (n = 9). Mean relative dose intensity for the first dose was 54.2% (range 37.5-75%) for DPYD heterozygous carriers and 93.2% (42.9-100%) for DPYD wild type carriers. Overall grade 3 or worse toxicity was similar in DPYD variant carriers (4/33, 12.1%) as compared to wild-type carriers (89/337, 25.7%; P = 0.0924). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates successful routine DPYD mutation testing prior to the initiation of fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy with high uptake. In patients with DPYD heterozygous variants with pre-emptive dose reductions, high incidence of severe toxicity was not observed. Our data supports routine DPYD genotype testing prior to commencement of fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy.

Comparison of BEAMing and Droplet Digital PCR for Circulating Tumor DNA Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) assays are increasingly used for clinical decision-making, but it is unknown how well different assays agree. We aimed to assess the agreement in ctDNA mutation calling between BEAMing (beads, emulsion, amplification, and magnetics) and droplet digital PCR (ddPCR), 2 of the most commonly used digital PCR techniques for detecting mutations in ctDNA. METHODS: Baseline plasma samples from patients with advanced breast cancer enrolled in the phase 3 PALOMA-3 trial were assessed for ESR1 and PIK3CA mutations in ctDNA with both BEAMing and ddPCR. Concordance between the 2 approaches was assessed, with exploratory analyses to estimate the importance of sampling effects. RESULTS: Of the 521 patients enrolled, 363 had paired baseline ctDNA analysis. ESR1 mutation detection was 24.2% (88/363) for BEAMing and 25.3% (92/363) for ddPCR, with good agreement between the 2 techniques (κ = 0.9l; 95% CI, 0.85-0.95). PIK3CA mutation detection rates were 26.2% (95/363) for BEAMing and 22.9% (83/363) for ddPCR, with good agreement (κ = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.81-0.93). Discordancy was observed for 3.9% patients with ESR1 mutations and 5.0% with PIK3CA mutations. Assessment of individual mutations suggested higher rates of discordancy for less common mutations (P = 0.019). The majority of discordant calls occurred at allele frequency <1%, predominantly resulting from stochastic sampling effects. CONCLUSIONS: This large, clinically relevant comparison showed good agreement between BEAMing and ddPCR, suggesting sufficient reproducibility for clinical use. Much of the observed discordancy may be related to sampling effects, potentially explaining many of the differences in the currently available ctDNA literature.

MicroRNAs as biomarkers for trastuzumab-based therapy in HER2-positive advanced oesophago-gastric cancer patients.

Background: This study aimed to identify microRNAs (miRs) as circulating biomarkers of resistance to first-line trastuzumab-based therapy in advanced HER2-positive oesophago-gastric cancer patients. Methods: A high-throughput 1015 Exiqon miRCURY LNA™ microRNA inhibitor library screen was performed in trastuzumab-treated HER2-positive NCI-N87 and HER2-negative FLO-1 oesophago-gastric cancer cell lines. NanoString nCounter® miR analysis was performed in NCI-N87, FLO-1, and MAGIC trial (ISRCTN93793971) formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) oesophago-gastric cancer patient samples. MiR-148a-3p copies in plasma samples were quantified using digital droplet polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) from HER2-positive oesophago-gastric cancer patients treated with standard-of-care trastuzumab-based therapy within the FOrMAT (NCT02112357) and PLATFORM (NCT02678182) clinical trials. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) for plasma miR-148a-3p HIGH (>median) versus LOW (≤median). The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and 3-month progression-free rates (PFRs) miR-148a-3p HIGH versus LOW. PLATFORM sensitivity analysis normalised miR-148a-3p (NmiR-148a-3p). Results: The inhibition of miR-148a-3p reduced NCI-N87 relative cell viability (<0.6) and expression was high (>242) in NCI-N87 and HER2-positive MAGIC trial patients (n=5). Normalised-miR-148a-3p (NmiR-148a-3p) LOW versus HIGH demonstrated a statistically significant difference in 3-month PFRs (n=23; OR, 0.11 [0.02-0.78]; p=0.027; aOR, 0.03 [0.001-0.71], p=0.029) but no difference in OS or PFS. There was no statistically significant relationship between miR-148-3p LOW versus HIGH for OS (PLATFORM, n=62; hazard ratio [HR], 0.98 [0.57-1.66]; p=0.933; FOrMAT, n=8; HR, 0.54 [0.13-2.31]; p=0.322), PFS (n=62; HR, 1.08 [0.65-1.81]; p=0.759; FOrMAT, n=8; HR, 1.26 [0.31-5.07]; p=0.714), or PFRs (PLATFORM, n=31; odds ratio [OR], 0.67 [0.2-2.8]; p=0.577). Conclusion: Normalised miR-148a-3p may be a relevant biomarker for trastuzumab-based therapy in advanced HER2-positive oesophago-gastric cancer patients.

Effect of perioperative FLOT versus ECF/ECX on short-term outcomes after surgery for resectable oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma: propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative FLOT (fluorouracil plus leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel) chemotherapy is a recent regimen used to treat resectable oesophagogastric (OG) adenocarcinoma, associated with improved overall survival versus earlier chemotherapy strategies. This study compared short-term perioperative morbidity in a large tertiary centre series of FLOT to a matched cohort receiving ECX/ECF (epirubicin, cisplatin, capecitabine (X) or 5-fluorouracil (F)). METHODS: Consecutive patients completing four perioperative cycles of FLOT and proceeding to surgery with resectable OG adenocarcinoma were included. This was matched to patients from a historic ECX/ECF cohort from the same institution. A propensity score was calculated, and a secondary analysis using a propensity-matched group performed. RESULTS: Cohorts were matched by tumour location and operations performed. In total there were 129 (64.5 per cent) oesophageal and 71 (35.5 per cent) gastric resections (FLOT 57 oesophageal, 43 gastric; ECF/ECX 64 oesophageal, 36 gastric). The median length of stay after surgery was 12 days in the FLOT group versus 15 in ECF/ECX (P = 0.035). There were no significant differences in overall perioperative complications and, specifically, no difference in OG anastomotic leaks, analysed by site (gastric (FLOT 0/79 (0 per cent) versus ECX 2/79 (2.5 per cent); P = 0.123), oesophageal (FLOT 4/121 (3.3 per cent) versus ECX 5/121 (4.1 per cent); P = 0.868) or type of surgery (open FLOT 1/121 (0.8 per cent) versus ECX 3/121 (2.5 per cent); P = 0.368; minimally invasive (FLOT 3/121 (2.5 per cent) versus ECX 2/121 (1.7 per cent); P = 0.555)). There was no statistical difference in leak-related return to theatre, 30-day (FLOT 0 (0 per cent) versus ECX 3/100 (3.0 per cent); P = 0.081), or 90-day (FLOT 0 (0 per cent) versus ECX 2/100 (2.0 per cent); P = 0.155) mortality. CONCLUSION: In terms of surgical complications, FLOT and ECX/ECF were equally safe in patients undergoing resection for OG adenocarcinoma.

Ibrutinib in c-MYC and HER2 Amplified Oesophagogastric Carcinoma: Results of the Proof-of-Concept iMYC Study.

Oesophagogastric (OG) cancer is a highly lethal disease requiring novel treatment options. c-MYC and/or HER-2 amplified oesophageal cancer models have demonstrated sensitivity to BTK inhibition with ibrutinib. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of ibrutinib in patients with c-MYC and/or HER2 amplified pre-treated advanced OG cancer. c-MYC and HER2 amplification status were determined by FISH. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints were disease control rate (DC) at 8 weeks, safety, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Eleven patients were enrolled. Eight patients had c-MYC amplified tumours, six were HER2 amplified and three were c-MYC and HER2 co-amplified. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events were fever, neutropenia, and vomiting. Grade ≥ 3 gastrointestinal haemorrhage occurred in three patients and was fatal in two cases. Among seven evaluable patients, three patients (43%) achieved a best response of SD at 8 weeks. No PR or CR was observed. Disease control was achieved for 32 weeks in one patient with a dual c-MYC and HER2 highly co-amplified tumour. The median PFS and OS were 1.5 (95% CI: 0.8-5.1) and 5.1 (95% CI: 0.8-14.5) months, respectively. Ibrutinib had limited clinical efficacy in patients with c-MYC and/or HER2 amplified OG cancer. Unexpected gastrointestinal bleeding was observed in 3 out of 8 treated patients which was considered a new safety finding for ibrutinib in this population.

Cytokine release syndrome in a patient with colorectal cancer after vaccination with BNT162b2.

Patients with cancer are currently prioritized in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination programs globally, which includes administration of mRNA vaccines. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) has not been reported with mRNA vaccines and is an extremely rare immune-related adverse event of immune checkpoint inhibitors. We present a case of CRS that occurred 5 d after vaccination with BTN162b2 (tozinameran)-the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA COVID-19 vaccine-in a patient with colorectal cancer on long-standing anti-PD-1 monotherapy. The CRS was evidenced by raised inflammatory markers, thrombocytopenia, elevated cytokine levels (IFN-γ/IL-2R/IL-18/IL-16/IL-10) and steroid responsiveness. The close temporal association of vaccination and diagnosis of CRS in this case suggests that CRS was a vaccine-related adverse event; with anti-PD1 blockade as a potential contributor. Overall, further prospective pharmacovigillence data are needed in patients with cancer, but the benefit-risk profile remains strongly in favor of COVID-19 vaccination in this population.

ESR1 Mutations and Overall Survival on Fulvestrant versus Exemestane in Advanced Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer: A Combined Analysis of the Phase III SoFEA and EFECT Trials.

PURPOSE: ESR1 mutations are acquired frequently in hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer after prior aromatase inhibitors. We assessed the clinical utility of baseline ESR1 circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis in the two phase III randomized trials of fulvestrant versus exemestane. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The phase III EFECT and SoFEA trials randomized patients with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer who had progressed on prior nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy, between fulvestrant 250 mg and exemestane. Baseline serum samples from 227 patients in EFECT, and baseline plasma from 161 patients in SoFEA, were analyzed for ESR1 mutations by digital PCR. The primary objectives were to assess the impact of ESR1 mutation status on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in a combined analysis of both studies. RESULTS: ESR1 mutations were detected in 30% (151/383) baseline samples. In patients with ESR1 mutation detected, PFS was 2.4 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.0-2.6] on exemestane and 3.9 months (95% CI, 3.0-6.0) on fulvestrant [hazard ratio (HR), 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.89; P = 0.01). In patients without ESR1 mutations detected, PFS was 4.8 months (95% CI, 3.7-6.2) on exemestane and 4.1 months (95% CI, 3.6-5.5) on fulvestrant (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.81-1.37; P = 0.69). There was an interaction between ESR1 mutation and treatment (P = 0.02). Patients with ESR1 mutation detected had 1-year OS of 62% (95% CI, 45%-75%) on exemestane and 80% (95% CI, 68%-87%) on fulvestrant (P = 0.04; restricted mean survival analysis). Patients without ESR1 mutations detected had 1-year OS of 79% (95% CI, 71%-85%) on exemestane and 81% (95% CI, 74%-87%) on fulvestrant (P = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Detection of ESR1 mutations in baseline ctDNA is associated with inferior PFS and OS in patients treated with exemestane versus fulvestrant.

Defining the true impact of coronavirus disease 2019 in the at-risk population of patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: In light of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, cancer centres in the United Kingdom and Europe re-organised their services at an unprecedented pace, and many patients with cancer have had their treatments severely disrupted. Patients with cancer were considered at high risk on sparse evidence, and despite a small number of emerging observational studies, the true incidence and impact of COVID-19 in the 'at-risk' population of patients with cancer is yet to be defined. METHODS: Epidemiological and clinical data were collected prospectively for patients attending the Royal Marsden Hospital and three network hospitals between March 1st and April 30th 2020 that were confirmed to have Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) infection. Significance of clinical and pathological characteristics was assessed using the Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon rank sum test, whilst univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to further assess risk. The number of patients attending in March/April 2020 for face-to-face attendances was also extracted. FINDINGS: During the 2-month study period, 867 of 13,489 (6.4%) patients met the criteria leading to swab testing. Of the total at-risk population, only 113 of 13,489 (0.84%) were swab positive, 101 of 13,489 (0.75%) required hospital admission and 29 of 13,489 (0.21%) died of COVID-19. Of the patients that attended the hospital to receive cytotoxic chemotherapy alone or in combination with other therapy, 59 of 2001 (2.9%) were admitted to the hospital for COVID-19-related issues and 20 of 2001 (1%) died. Of the patients that collected targeted treatments, 16 of 1126 (1.4%) were admitted and 1 of 1126 (0.1%) died. Of the 11 patients that had received radiotherapy, 6 of 1042 (0.6%) required inpatient admission and 2 of 1042 (0.2%) died. INTERPRETATIONS: Administration of systemic anticancer therapy appears to be associated with a modest risk of severe COVID-19 infection. Based on this snapshot taken as the first wave of COVID-19 hit our practice, we conclude that continuation of active cancer treatment, even in the palliative setting, is appropriate.

Inactivating NF1 Mutations Are Enriched in Advanced Breast Cancer and Contribute to Endocrine Therapy Resistance.

PURPOSE: Advanced breast cancer (ABC) has not been subjected to the same degree of molecular scrutiny as early primary cancer. Breast cancer evolves with time and under the selective pressure of treatment, with the potential to acquire mutations with resistance to treatment and disease progression. To identify potentially targetable mutations in advanced breast cancer, we performed prospective molecular characterization of a cohort of patients with ABC. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Biopsies from patients with advanced breast cancer were sequenced with a 41 genes targeted panel in the ABC Biopsy (ABC-Bio) study. Blood samples were collected at disease progression for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis, along with matched primary tumor to assess for acquisition in ABC in a subset of patients. RESULTS: We sequenced 210 ABC samples, demonstrating enrichment compared with primary disease for potentially targetable mutations in HER2 (in 6.19% of samples), AKT1 (7.14%), and NF1 (8.10%). Of these enriched mutations, we show that NF1 mutations were frequently acquired in ABC, not present in the original primary disease. In ER-positive cancer cell line models, loss of NF1 resulted in endocrine therapy resistance, through both ER-dependent and -independent mechanisms. NF1 loss promoted ER-independent cyclin D1 expression, which could be therapeutically targeted with CDK4/6 inhibitors in vitro. Patients with NF1 mutations detected in baseline circulating tumor DNA had a good outcome on the CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib and fulvestrant. CONCLUSIONS: Our research identifies multiple therapeutic opportunities for advanced breast cancer and identifies the previously underappreciated acquisition of NF1 mutations.

ESR1 mutations in metastatic lobular breast cancer patients.

Invasive lobular breast cancer (ILC) represents the second most common histology of breast cancer after invasive ductal breast cancer (IDC), accounts for up to 15% of all invasive cases and generally express the estrogen receptor (ER, coded by the ESR1 gene). ESR1 mutations have been associated with resistance to endocrine therapy, however these have not been specifically evaluated in ILC. We assessed the frequency of ESR1 mutations by droplet digital PCR in a retrospective multi-centric series of matched primary tumor and recurrence samples (n = 279) from 80 metastatic ER-positive ILC patients. We further compared ESR1 mutations between IDC and ILC patients in metastatic samples from MSKCC-IMPACT (n = 595 IDC and 116 ILC) and in ctDNA from the SoFEA and PALOMA-3 trials (n = 416 IDC and 76 ILC). In the retrospective series, the metastases from seven patients (9%) harbored ESR1 mutations, which were absent from the interrogated primary samples. Five patients (6%) had a mutation in the primary tumor or axillary metastasis, which could not be detected in the matched distant metastasis. In the MSKCC-IMPACT cohort, as well as in the SoFEA and PALOMA-3 trials, there were no differences in prevalence and distribution of the mutations between IDC and ILC, with D538G being the most frequent mutation in both histological subtypes. To conclude, no patient had an identical ESR1 mutation in the early and metastatic disease in the retrospective ILC series. In the external series, there was no difference in terms of prevalence and type of ESR1 mutations between ILC and IDC.

Early circulating tumor DNA dynamics and clonal selection with palbociclib and fulvestrant for breast cancer.

CDK4/6 inhibition substantially improves progression-free survival (PFS) for women with advanced estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, although there are no predictive biomarkers. Early changes in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) level may provide early response prediction, but the impact of tumor heterogeneity is unknown. Here we use plasma samples from patients in the randomized phase III PALOMA-3 study of CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib and fulvestrant for women with advanced breast cancer and show that relative change in PIK3CA ctDNA level after 15 days treatment strongly predicts PFS on palbociclib and fulvestrant (hazard ratio 3.94, log-rank p = 0.0013). ESR1 mutations selected by prior hormone therapy are shown to be frequently sub clonal, with ESR1 ctDNA dynamics offering limited prediction of clinical outcome. These results suggest that early ctDNA dynamics may provide a robust biomarker for CDK4/6 inhibitors, with early ctDNA dynamics demonstrating divergent response of tumor sub clones to treatment.

Diverse BRCA1 and BRCA2 Reversion Mutations in Circulating Cell-Free DNA of Therapy-Resistant Breast or Ovarian Cancer.

Purpose: Resistance to platinum-based chemotherapy or PARP inhibition in germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers may occur through somatic reversion mutations or intragenic deletions that restore BRCA1 or BRCA2 function. We assessed whether BRCA1/2 reversion mutations could be identified in circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) of patients with ovarian or breast cancer previously treated with platinum and/or PARP inhibitors.Experimental Design: cfDNA from 24 prospectively accrued patients with germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, including 19 patients with platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian cancer and five patients with platinum and/or PARP inhibitor pretreated metastatic breast cancer, was subjected to massively parallel sequencing targeting all exons of 141 genes and all exons and introns of BRCA1 and BRCA2 Functional studies were performed to assess the impact of the putative BRCA1/2 reversion mutations on BRCA1/2 function.Results: Diverse and often polyclonal putative BRCA1 or BRCA2 reversion mutations were identified in cfDNA from four patients with ovarian cancer (21%) and from two patients with breast cancer (40%). BRCA2 reversion mutations were detected in cfDNA prior to PARP inhibitor treatment in a patient with breast cancer who did not respond to treatment and were enriched in plasma samples after PARP inhibitor therapy. Foci formation and immunoprecipitation assays suggest that a subset of the putative reversion mutations restored BRCA1/2 function.Conclusions: Putative BRCA1/2 reversion mutations can be detected by cfDNA sequencing analysis in patients with ovarian and breast cancer. Our findings warrant further investigation of cfDNA sequencing to identify putative BRCA1/2 reversion mutations and to aid the selection of patients for PARP inhibition therapy. Clin Cancer Res; 23(21); 6708-20. ©2017 AACR.

Discovery of naturally occurring ESR1 mutations in breast cancer cell lines modelling endocrine resistance.

Resistance to endocrine therapy remains a major clinical problem in breast cancer. Genetic studies highlight the potential role of estrogen receptor-α (ESR1) mutations, which show increased prevalence in the metastatic, endocrine-resistant setting. No naturally occurring ESR1 mutations have been reported in in vitro models of BC either before or after the acquisition of endocrine resistance making functional consequences difficult to study. We report the first discovery of naturally occurring ESR1 Y537C and ESR1 Y537S mutations in MCF7 and SUM44 ESR1-positive cell lines after acquisition of resistance to long-term-estrogen-deprivation (LTED) and subsequent resistance to fulvestrant (ICIR). Mutations were enriched with time, impacted on ESR1 binding to the genome and altered the ESR1 interactome. The results highlight the importance and functional consequence of these mutations and provide an important resource for studying endocrine resistance.

Reproducibility of Digital PCR Assays for Circulating Tumor DNA Analysis in Advanced Breast Cancer.

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis has the potential to allow non-invasive analysis of tumor mutations in advanced cancer. In this study we assessed the reproducibility of digital PCR (dPCR) assays of circulating tumor DNA in a cohort of patients with advanced breast cancer and assessed delayed plasma processing using cell free DNA preservative tubes. We recruited a cohort of 96 paired samples from 71 women with advanced breast cancer who had paired blood samples processed either immediately or delayed in preservative tubes with processing 48-72 hours after collection. Plasma DNA was analysed with multiplex digital PCR (mdPCR) assays for hotspot mutations in PIK3CA, ESR1 and ERBB2, and for AKT1 E17K. There was 94.8% (91/96) agreement in mutation calling between immediate and delayed processed tubes, kappa 0.88 95% CI 0.77-0.98). Discordance in mutation calling resulted from low allele frequency and likely stochastic effects. In concordant samples there was high correlation in mutant copies per ml plasma (r2 = 0.98; p<0.0001). There was elevation of total cell free plasma DNA concentrations in 10.3% of delayed processed tubes, although overall quantification of total cell free plasma DNA had similar prognostic effects in immediate (HR 3.6) and delayed (HR 3.0) tubes. There was moderate agreement in changes in allele fraction between sequential samples in quantitative mutation tracking (r = 0.84, p = 0.0002). Delayed processing of samples using preservative tubes allows for centralized ctDNA digital PCR mutation screening in advanced breast cancer. The potential of preservative tubes in quantitative mutation tracking requires further research.

Plasma ESR1 Mutations and the Treatment of Estrogen Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: ESR1 mutations are selected by prior aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy in advanced breast cancer. We assessed the impact of ESR1 mutations on sensitivity to standard therapies in two phase III randomized trials that represent the development of the current standard therapy for estrogen receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a prospective-retrospective analysis, we assessed ESR1 mutations in available archived baseline plasma from the SoFEA (Study of Faslodex Versus Exemestane With or Without Arimidex) trial, which compared exemestane with fulvestrant-containing regimens in patients with prior sensitivity to nonsteroidal AI and in baseline plasma from the PALOMA3 (Palbociclib Combined With Fulvestrant in Hormone Receptor-Positive HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer After Endocrine Failure) trial, which compared fulvestrant plus placebo with fulvestrant plus palbociclib in patients with progression after receiving prior endocrine therapy. ESR1 mutations were analyzed by multiplex digital polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: In SoFEA, ESR1 mutations were found in 39.1% of patients (63 of 161), of whom 49.1% (27 of 55) were polyclonal, with rates of mutation detection unaffected by delays in processing of archival plasma. Patients with ESR1 mutations had improved progression-free survival (PFS) after taking fulvestrant (n = 45) compared with exemestane (n = 18; hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.92; P = .02), whereas patients with wild-type ESR1 had similar PFS after receiving either treatment (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.67; P = .77). In PALOMA3, ESR1 mutations were found in the plasma of 25.3% of patients (91 of 360), of whom 28.6% (26 of 91) were polyclonal, with mutations associated with acquired resistance to prior AI. Fulvestrant plus palbociclib improved PFS compared with fulvestrant plus placebo in both ESR1 mutant (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.74; P = .002) and ESR1 wild-type patients (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.70; P < .001). CONCLUSION: ESR1 mutation analysis in plasma after progression after prior AI therapy may help direct choice of further endocrine-based therapy. Additional confirmatory studies are required.

Management of breast cancer in older and frail patients.

Almost 50% of breast cancer occurs in women over the age of 65 years. The incidence of non standard adjuvant treatment increases with age and this group are under represented in clinical trials. We discuss tools to aid patient selection and adjuvant treatments including surgery, radiotherapy and systemic therapies for this group of patients.

The hypothalamic mechanisms of the hypophysiotropic action of ghrelin.

Ghrelin is an endogenous ligand for the growth hormone secretagogue (GHS) receptor, expressed in the hypothalamus and pituitary. Ghrelin, like synthetic GHSs, stimulates food intake and growth hormone (GH) release following systemic or intracerebroventricular administration. In addition to GH stimulation, ghrelin and synthetic GHSs are reported to stimulate the hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis in vivo. The aims of this study were to elucidate the hypothalamic mechanisms of the hypophysiotropic actions of ghrelin in vitro and to assess the relative contribution of hypothalamic and systemic actions of ghrelin on the HPA axis in vivo. Ghrelin (100 and 1,000 nM) stimulated significant release of GH-releasing hormone (GHRH) from hypothalamic explants (100 nM: 39.4 +/- 8.3 vs. basal 18.3 +/- 3.5 fmol/explant, n = 49, p < 0.05) but did not affect either basal or 28 mM KCl-stimulated somatostatin release. Ghrelin (10, 100 and 1,000 nM) stimulated the release of both corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH) (100 nM: 6.0 +/- 0.8 vs. basal 4.2 +/- 0.5 pmol/explant, n = 49, p < 0.05) and arginine vasopressin (AVP) (100 nM: 49.2 +/- 5.9 vs. basal 35.0 +/- 3.3 fmol/explant, n = 48, p < 0.05), whilst ghrelin (100 and 1,000 nM) also stimulated the release of neuropeptide Y (NPY) (100 nM: 111.4 +/- 25.0 vs. basal 54.4 +/- 9.0 fmol/explant, n = 26, p < 0.05) from hypothalamic explants in vitro. The HPA axis was stimulated in vivo following acute intracerebroventricular administration of ghrelin 2 nmol [adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) 38.2 +/- 3.9 vs. saline 18.2 +/- 2.0 pg/ml, p < 0.01; corticosterone 310.1 +/- 32.8 ng/ml vs. saline 167.4 +/- 40.7 ng/ml, p < 0.05], but not following intraperitoneal administration of ghrelin 30 nmol, suggesting a hypothalamic site of action. These data suggest that the mechanisms of GH and ACTH regulation by ghrelin may include hypothalamic release of GHRH, CRH, AVP and NPY.