Molecular profiling of aromatase inhibitor sensitive and resistant ER+HER2- postmenopausal breast cancers.

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) reduce recurrences and mortality in postmenopausal patients with oestrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer (BC), but >20% of patients will eventually relapse. Given the limited understanding of intrinsic resistance in these tumours, here we conduct a large-scale molecular analysis to identify features that impact on the response of ER + HER2- BC to AI. We compare the 15% of poorest responders (PRs, n = 177) as measured by proportional Ki67 changes after 2 weeks of neoadjuvant AI to good responders (GRs, n = 190) selected from the top 50% responders in the POETIC trial and matched for baseline Ki67 categories. In this work, low ESR1 levels are associated with poor response, high proliferation, high expression of growth factor pathways and non-luminal subtypes. PRs having high ESR1 expression have similar proportions of luminal subtypes to GRs but lower plasma estradiol levels, lower expression of estrogen response genes, higher levels of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes and immune markers, and more TP53 mutations.

Long-term outcome and prognostic value of Ki67 after perioperative endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer (POETIC): an open-label, multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative and perioperative aromatase inhibitor (POAI) therapy has the potential to improve outcomes in women with operable oestrogen receptor-positive primary breast cancer. It has also been suggested that tumour Ki67 values after 2 weeks (Ki672W) of POAI predicts individual patient outcome better than baseline Ki67 (Ki67B). The POETIC trial aimed to test these two hypotheses. METHODS: POETIC was an open-label, multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, phase 3 trial (done in 130 UK hospitals) in which postmenopausal women aged at least 50 years with WHO performance status 0-1 and hormone receptor-positive, operable breast cancer were randomly assigned (2:1) to POAI (letrozole 2·5 mg per day orally or anastrozole 1 mg per day orally) for 14 days before and following surgery or no POAI (control). Adjuvant treatment was given as per UK standard local practice. Randomisation was done centrally by computer-generated permuted block method (variable block size of six or nine) and was stratified by hospital. Treatment allocation was not masked. The primary endpoint was time to recurrence. A key second objective explored association between Ki67 (dichotomised at 10%) and disease outcomes. The primary analysis for clinical endpoints was by modified intention to treat (excluding patients who withdrew consent). For Ki67 biomarker association and endpoint analysis, the evaluable population included all randomly assigned patients who had paired Ki67 values available. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02338310; the European Clinical Trials database, EudraCT2007-003877-21; and the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN63882543. Recruitment is complete and long-term follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Oct 13, 2008, and April 16, 2014, 4480 women were recruited and randomly assigned to POAI (n=2976) or control (n=1504). On Feb 6, 2018, median follow-up was 62·9 months (IQR 58·1-74·1). 434 (10%) of 4480 women had a breast cancer recurrence (280 [9%] POAI; 154 [10%] control), hazard ratio 0·92 (95% CI 0·75-1·12); p=0·40 with the proportion free from breast cancer recurrence at 5 years of 91·0% (95% CI 89·9-92·0) for patients in the POAI group and 90·4% (88·7-91·9) in the control group. Within the POAI-treated HER2-negative subpopulation, 5-year recurrence risk in women with low Ki67B and Ki672W (low-low) was 4·3% (95% CI 2·9-6·3), 8·4% (6·8-10·5) with high Ki67B and low Ki672W (high-low) and 21·5% (17·1-27·0) with high Ki67B and Ki672W (high-high). Within the POAI-treated HER2-positive subpopulation, 5-year recurrence risk in the low-low group was 10·1% (95% CI 3·2-31·3), 7·7% (3·4-17·5) in the high-low group, and 15·7% (10·1-24·4) in the high-high group. The most commonly reported grade 3 adverse events were hot flushes (20 [1%] of 2801 patients in the POAI group vs six [<1%] of 1400 in the control group) and musculoskeletal pain (29 [1%] vs 13 [1%]). No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: POAI has not been shown to improve treatment outcome, but can be used without detriment to help select appropriate adjuvant therapy based on tumour Ki67. Most patients with low Ki67B or low POAI-induced Ki672W do well with adjuvant standard endocrine therapy (giving consideration to clinical-pathological factors), whereas those whose POAI-induced Ki672W remains high might benefit from further adjuvant treatment or trials of new therapies. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

Impact of aromatase inhibitor treatment on global gene expression and its association with antiproliferative response in ER+ breast cancer in postmenopausal patients.

BACKGROUND: Endocrine therapy reduces breast cancer mortality by 40%, but resistance remains a major clinical problem. In this study, we sought to investigate the impact of aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy on gene expression and identify gene modules representing key biological pathways that relate to early AI therapy resistance. METHODS: Global gene expression was measured on pairs of core-cut biopsies taken at baseline and at surgery from 254 patients with ER-positive primary breast cancer randomised to receive 2-week presurgical AI (n = 198) or no presurgical treatment (control n = 56) from the POETIC trial. Data from the AI group was adjusted to eliminate artefactual process-related changes identified in the control group. The response was assessed by changes in the proliferation marker, Ki67. RESULTS: High baseline ESR1 expression associated with better AI response in HER2+ tumours but not HER2- tumours. In HER2- tumours, baseline expression of 48 genes associated with poor antiproliferative response (p < 0.005) including PERP and YWHAQ, the two most significant, and the transcription co-regulators (SAP130, HDAC4, and NCOA7) which were among the top 16 most significant. Baseline gene signature scores measuring cell proliferation, growth factor signalling (ERBB2-GS, RET/GDNF-GS, and IGF-1-GS), and immune activity (STAT1-GS) were significantly higher in poor AI responders. Two weeks of AI caused downregulation of genes involved in cell proliferation and ER signalling, as expected. Signature scores of E2F activation and TP53 dysfunction after 2-week AI were associated with poor AI response in both HER2- and HER2+ patients. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high degree of heterogeneity in adaptive mechanisms after as little as 2-week AI therapy; however, all appear to converge on cell cycle regulation. Our data support the evaluation of whether an E2F signatures after short-term exposure to AI may identify those patients most likely to benefit from the early addition of CDK4/6 inhibitors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN63882543, registered on 18 December 2007.

Major Impact of Sampling Methodology on Gene Expression in Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer.

To investigate the impact of sampling methodology on gene expression data from primary estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer biopsies, global gene expression was measured in core-cut biopsies at baseline and surgery from patients randomly assigned to receive either two weeks of presurgical aromatase inhibitor (AI; n = 157) or no presurgical treatment (n = 56). Those genes most markedly altered in the AI group (eg, FOS, DUSP1, RGS1, FOSB) were similarly altered in the no treatment group; some widely investigated genes that were apparently unaffected in the AI group (eg, MYC) were counter-altered in the control group, masking actual AI-dependent changes. In the absence of a control group, these artefactual changes would likely lead to the most affected genes being the erroneous focus of research. The findings are likely relevant to all archival collections of ER+ breast cancer.

Impact of mutational profiles on response of primary oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancers to oestrogen deprivation.

Pre-surgical studies allow study of the relationship between mutations and response of oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer to aromatase inhibitors (AIs) but have been limited to small biopsies. Here in phase I of this study, we perform exome sequencing on baseline, surgical core-cuts and blood from 60 patients (40 AI treated, 20 controls). In poor responders (based on Ki67 change), we find significantly more somatic mutations than good responders. Subclones exclusive to baseline or surgical cores occur in ∼30% of tumours. In phase II, we combine targeted sequencing on another 28 treated patients with phase I. We find six genes frequently mutated: PIK3CA, TP53, CDH1, MLL3, ABCA13 and FLG with 71% concordance between paired cores. TP53 mutations are associated with poor response. We conclude that multiple biopsies are essential for confident mutational profiling of ER+ breast cancer and TP53 mutations are associated with resistance to oestrogen deprivation therapy.

Prediction of late distant recurrence in patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer: a prospective comparison of the breast-cancer index (BCI) assay, 21-gene recurrence score, and IHC4 in the TransATAC study population.

BACKGROUND: Biomarkers to improve the risk-benefit of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy for late recurrence in patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer would be clinically valuable. We compared the prognostic ability of the breast-cancer index (BCI) assay, 21-gene recurrence score (Oncotype DX), and an immunohistochemical prognostic model (IHC4) for both early and late recurrence in patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive, node-negative (N0) disease who took part in the Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination (ATAC) clinical trial. METHODS: In this prospective comparison study, we obtained archival tumour blocks from the TransATAC tissue bank from all postmenopausal patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer from whom the 21-gene recurrence score and IHC4 values had already been derived. We did BCI analysis in matched samples with sufficient residual RNA using two BCI models-cubic (BCI-C) and linear (BCI-L)-using previously validated cutoffs. We assessed prognostic ability of BCI for distant recurrence over 10 years (the primary endpoint) and compared it with that of the 21-gene recurrence score and IHC4. We also tested the ability of the assays to predict early (0-5 years) and late (5-10 years) distant recurrence. To assess the ability of the biomarkers to predict recurrence beyond standard clinicopathological variables, we calculated the change in the likelihood-ratio χ(2) (LR-Δχ(2)) from Cox proportional hazards models. FINDINGS: Suitable tissue was available from 665 patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive, N0 breast cancer for BCI analysis. The primary analysis showed significant differences in risk of distant recurrence over 10 years in the categorical BCI-C risk groups (p<0·0001) with 6·8% (95% CI 4·4-10·0) of patients in the low-risk group, 17·3% (12·0-24·7) in the intermediate group, and 22·2% (15·3-31·5) in the high-risk group having distant recurrence. The secondary analysis showed that BCI-L was a much stronger predictor for overall (0-10 year) distant recurrence compared with BCI-C (interquartile HR 2·30 [95% CI 1·62-3·27]; LR-Δχ(2)=22·69; p<0·0001). When compared with BCI-L, the 21-gene recurrence score was less predictive (HR 1·48 [95% CI 1·22-1·78]; LR-Δχ(2)=13·68; p=0·0002) and IHC4 was similar (HR 1·69 [95% CI 1·51-2·56]; LR-Δχ(2)=22·83; p<0·0001). All further analyses were done with the BCI-L model. In a multivariable analysis, all assays had significant prognostic ability for early distant recurrence (BCI-L HR 2·77 [95% CI 1·63-4·70], LR-Δχ(2)=15·42, p<0·0001; 21-gene recurrence score HR 1·80 [1·42-2·29], LR-Δχ(2)=18·48, p<0·0001; IHC4 HR 2·90 [2·01-4·18], LR-Δχ(2)=29·14, p<0·0001); however, only BCI-L was significant for late distant recurrence (BCI-L HR 1·95 [95% CI 1·22-3·14], LR-Δχ(2)=7·97, p=0·0048; 21-gene recurrence score HR 1·13 [0·82-1·56], LR-Δχ(2)=0·48, p=0·47; IHC4 HR 1·30 [0·88-1·94], LR-Δχ(2)=1·59, p=0·20). INTERPRETATION: BCI-L was the only significant prognostic test for risk of both early and late distant recurrence and identified two risk populations for each timeframe. It could help to identify patients at high risk for late distant recurrence who might benefit from extended endocrine or other therapy. FUNDING: Avon Foundation, National Institutes of Health, Breast Cancer Foundation, US Department of Defense Breast Cancer Research Program, Susan G Komen for the Cure, Breakthrough Breast Cancer through the Mary-Jean Mitchell Green Foundation, AstraZeneca, Cancer Research UK, and the National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre at the Royal Marsden (London, UK).

ESR1 is co-expressed with closely adjacent uncharacterised genes spanning a breast cancer susceptibility locus at 6q25.1.

Approximately 80% of human breast carcinomas present as oestrogen receptor α-positive (ER+ve) disease, and ER status is a critical factor in treatment decision-making. Recently, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the region immediately upstream of the ER gene (ESR1) on 6q25.1 have been associated with breast cancer risk. Our investigation of factors associated with the level of expression of ESR1 in ER+ve tumours has revealed unexpected associations between genes in this region and ESR1 expression that are important to consider in studies of the genetic causes of breast cancer risk. RNA from tumour biopsies taken from 104 postmenopausal women before and after 2 weeks treatment with an aromatase (oestrogen synthase) inhibitor was analyzed on Illumina 48K microarrays. Multiple-testing corrected Spearman correlation revealed that three previously uncharacterized open reading frames (ORFs) located immediately upstream of ESR1, C6ORF96, C6ORF97, and C6ORF211 were highly correlated with ESR1 (Rs =  0.67, 0.64, and 0.55 respectively, FDR<1 × 10(-7)). Publicly available datasets confirmed this relationship in other groups of ER+ve tumours. DNA copy number changes did not account for the correlations. The correlations were maintained in cultured cells. An ERα antagonist did not affect the ORFs' expression or their correlation with ESR1, suggesting their transcriptional co-activation is not directly mediated by ERα. siRNA inhibition of C6ORF211 suppressed proliferation in MCF7 cells, and C6ORF211 positively correlated with a proliferation metagene in tumours. In contrast, C6ORF97 expression correlated negatively with the metagene and predicted for improved disease-free survival in a tamoxifen-treated published dataset, independently of ESR1. Our observations suggest that some of the biological effects previously attributed to ER could be mediated and/or modified by these co-expressed genes. The co-expression and function of these genes may be important influences on the recently identified relationship between SNPs in this region and breast cancer risk.

The role of ghrelin and ghrelin-receptor gene variants and promoter activity in type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Ghrelin and its receptor play an important role in glucose metabolism and energy homeostasis, and therefore they are functional candidates for genes carrying susceptibility alleles for type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We assessed common genetic variation of the ghrelin (GHRL; five single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP)) and the ghrelin-receptor (GHSR) genes (four SNPs) in 610 Caucasian patients with type 2 diabetes and 820 controls. In addition, promoter reporter assays were conducted to model the regulatory regions of both genes. RESULTS: Neither GHRL nor GHSR gene SNPs were associated with type 2 diabetes. One of the ghrelin haplotypes showed a marginal protective role in type 2 diabetes. We observed profound differences in the regulation of the GHRL gene according to promoter sequence variants. There are three different GHRL promoter haplotypes represented in the studied cohort causing up to 45% difference in the level of gene expression, while the promoter region of GHSR gene is primarily represented by a single haplotype. CONCLUSION: The GHRL and GHSR gene variants are not associated with type 2 diabetes, although GHRL promoter variants have significantly different activities.