Anti-EGFR Antibody-Drug Conjugate Carrying an Inhibitor Targeting CDK Restricts Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Growth.

PURPOSE: Anti-EGFR antibodies show limited response in breast cancer, partly due to activation of compensatory pathways. Furthermore, despite the clinical success of cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors in hormone receptor-positive tumors, aggressive triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC) are largely resistant due to CDK2/cyclin E expression, whereas free CDK2 inhibitors display normal tissue toxicity, limiting their therapeutic application. A cetuximab-based antibody drug conjugate (ADC) carrying a CDK inhibitor selected based on oncogene dysregulation, alongside patient subgroup stratification, may provide EGFR-targeted delivery. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Expressions of G1/S-phase cell cycle regulators were evaluated alongside EGFR in breast cancer. We conjugated cetuximab with CDK inhibitor SNS-032, for specific delivery to EGFR-expressing cells. We assessed ADC internalization and its antitumor functions in vitro and in orthotopically grown basal-like/TNBC xenografts. RESULTS: Transcriptomic (6,173 primary, 27 baseline, and matched post-chemotherapy residual tumors), single-cell RNA sequencing (150,290 cells, 27 treatment-naïve tumors), and spatial transcriptomic (43 tumor sections, 22 TNBCs) analyses confirmed expression of CDK2 and its cyclin partners in basal-like/TNBCs, associated with EGFR. Spatiotemporal live-cell imaging and super-resolution confocal microscopy demonstrated ADC colocalization with late lysosomal clusters. The ADC inhibited cell cycle progression, induced cytotoxicity against high EGFR-expressing tumor cells, and bystander killing of neighboring EGFR-low tumor cells, but minimal effects on immune cells. Despite carrying a small molar fraction (1.65%) of the SNS-032 inhibitor, the ADC restricted EGFR-expressing spheroid and cell line/patient-derived xenograft tumor growth. CONCLUSIONS: Exploiting EGFR overexpression, and dysregulated cell cycle in aggressive and treatment-refractory tumors, a cetuximab-CDK inhibitor ADC may provide selective and efficacious delivery of cell cycle-targeted agents to basal-like/TNBCs, including chemotherapy-resistant residual disease.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in OlympiA: A Phase III, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Adjuvant Olaparib in gBRCA1/2 Mutations and High-Risk Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Early Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: The OlympiA randomized phase III trial compared 1 year of olaparib (OL) or placebo (PL) as adjuvant therapy in patients with germline BRCA1/2, high-risk human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer after completing (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy ([N]ACT), surgery, and radiotherapy. The patient-reported outcome primary hypothesis was that OL-treated patients may experience greater fatigue during treatment. METHODS: Data were collected before random assignment, and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. The primary end point was fatigue, measured with the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue scale. Secondary end points, assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire, Core 30 item, included nausea and vomiting (NV), diarrhea, and multiple functional domains. Scores were compared between treatment groups using mixed model for repeated measures. Two-sided P values <.05 were statistically significant for the primary end point. All secondary end points were descriptive. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred and thirty-eight patients (NACT: 746, ACT: 792) contributed to the analysis. Fatigue severity was statistically significantly greater for OL versus PL, but not clinically meaningfully different by prespecified criteria (≥3 points) at 6 months (diff OL v PL: NACT: -1.3 [95% CI, -2.4 to -0.2]; P = .022; ACT: -1.3 [95% CI, -2.3 to -0.2]; P = .017) and 12 months (NACT: -1.6 [95% CI, -2.8 to -0.3]; P = .017; ACT: -1.3 [95% CI, -2.4 to -0.2]; P = .025). There were no significant differences in fatigue severity between treatment groups at 18 and 24 months. NV severity was worse in patients treated with OL compared with PL at 6 months (NACT: 6.0 [95% CI, 4.1 to 8.0]; ACT: 5.3 [95% CI, 3.4 to 7.2]) and 12 months (NACT: 6.4 [95% CI, 4.4 to 8.3]; ACT: 4.5 [95% CI, 2.8 to 6.1]). During treatment, there were some clinically meaningful differences between groups for other symptoms but not for function subscales or global health status. CONCLUSION: Treatment-emergent symptoms from OL were limited, generally resolving after treatment ended. OL- and PL-treated patients had similar functional scores, slowly improving during the 24 months after (N)ACT and there was no clinically meaningful persistence of fatigue severity in OL-treated patients.