A New Era in ER+ Breast Cancer: Best-in-Class Oral Selective Estrogen Receptor Degrader (SERD) Designed as an Endocrine Backbone Treatment.

There has been intense interest in developing orally bioavailable SERDs, energized by the recent discovery of treatment-resistant ESR1 mutations. Overcoming the two decades long challenge of combining all the desirable activities and properties into one molecule, GDC-9545 (giredestrant) was identified with an exceptional preclinical profile. This Viewpoint seeks to place this molecule in the historical context of previously reported oral SERDs and highlights the exciting clinical potential for a best-in-class oral SERD.

Alpelisib plus fulvestrant in PIK3CA-mutated, hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer after a CDK4/6 inhibitor (BYLieve): one cohort of a phase 2, multicentre, open-label, non-comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Alpelisib, a PI3Kα-selective inhibitor and degrader, plus fulvestrant showed efficacy in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, PIK3CA-mutated advanced breast cancer in SOLAR-1; limited data are available in the post-cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor setting. BYLieve aimed to assess alpelisib plus endocrine therapy in this setting in three cohorts defined by immediate previous treatment; here, we report results from cohort A. METHODS: This ongoing, phase 2, multicentre, open-label, non-comparative study enrolled patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer with tumour PIK3CA mutation, following progression on or after previous therapy, including CDK4/6 inhibitors, from 114 study locations (cancer centres, medical centres, university hospitals, and hospitals) in 18 countries worldwide. Participants aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less, with no more than two previous anticancer treatments and no more than one previous chemotherapy regimen, were enrolled in three cohorts. In cohort A, patients must have had progression on or after a CDK4/6 inhibitor plus an aromatase inhibitor as the immediate previous treatment. Patients received oral alpelisib 300 mg/day (continuously) plus fulvestrant 500 mg intramuscularly on day 1 of each 28-day cycle and on day 15 of cycle 1. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients alive without disease progression at 6 months per local assessment using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, in patients with a centrally confirmed PIK3CA mutation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03056755. FINDINGS: Between Aug 14, 2017, and Dec 17, 2019 (data cutoff), 127 patients with at least 6 months' follow-up were enrolled into cohort A. 121 patients had a centrally confirmed PIK3CA mutation. At data cutoff, median follow-up was 11·7 months (IQR 8·5-15·9). 61 (50·4%; 95% CI 41·2-59·6) of 121 patients were alive without disease progression at 6 months. The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse events were hyperglycaemia (36 [28%] of 127 patients), rash (12 [9%]), and rash maculopapular (12 [9%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 33 (26%) of 127 patients. No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: BYLieve showed activity of alpelisib plus fulvestrant with manageable toxicity in patients with PIK3CA-mutated, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer, after progression on a CDK4/6 inhibitor plus an aromatase inhibitor. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

Abemaciclib plus trastuzumab with or without fulvestrant versus trastuzumab plus standard-of-care chemotherapy in women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (monarcHER): a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with HER2-positive breast cancer who have received two or more previous therapies for advanced disease have few effective treatment options. The monarcHER trial aimed to compare the efficacy of abemaciclib plus trastuzumab with or without fulvestrant with standard-of-care chemotherapy of physician's choice plus trastuzumab in women with advanced breast cancer. METHODS: This phase 2, three-group, open-label trial was done across 75 hospitals, clinics, and medical centres in 14 countries. Eligible patients were women aged 18 years or older, who had hormone receptor-positive, HER2-positive advanced breast cancer with unresectable, locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and who had previously received at least two HER2-targeted therapies for advanced disease. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to the abemaciclib, trastuzumab, and fulvestrant (group A), abemaciclib and trastuzumab (group B), or standard-of-care chemotherapy and trastuzumab (group C). Oral abemaciclib 150 mg 12 hourly was administered on days 1-21 of a 21-day cycle, intravenous trastuzumab 8 mg/kg on cycle 1 day 1, followed by 6 mg/kg on day 1 of each subsequent 21-day cycle, and intramuscular fulvestrant 500 mg on days 1, 15, and 29 and once every 4 weeks thereafter. Standard-of-care chemotherapy was administered as specified by the product label. Randomisation was by a computer-generated random sequence by means of an interactive web-response system and stratified by number of previous systemic therapies for advanced breast cancer and measurable versus non-measurable disease. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, first testing group A versus group C and, if this result was significant, then group B versus group C. Safety was assessed in all patients who had received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02675231) and is ongoing for long-term survival follow-up. FINDINGS: Between May 31, 2016, and Feb 28, 2018, 325 patients were screened, of whom 237 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to groups A (n=79), B (n=79), and C (n=79). Median follow-up was 19·0 months (IQR 14·7-25·1). The study met its primary endpoint, showing a significant difference at the prespecified two-sided α of 0·2 in median progression-free survival between group A (8·3 months, 95% CI 5·9-12·6) and group C (5·7 months, 5·4-7·0; HR 0·67 [95% CI 0·45-1·00]; p=0·051). No difference was observed between median progression-free survival in group B (5·7 months, 95% CI 4·2-7·2) and group C (HR 0·94 [0·64-1·38]; p=0·77). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse event in groups A, B, and C was neutropenia (21 [27%] of 78 patients, 17 [22%] of 77, and 19 [26%] of 72). The most common serious adverse events were: in group A, pyrexia (three [4%]), diarrhoea (two [3%]), urinary tract infection (two [3%]), and acute kidney injury (two [3%]); in group B, diarrhoea (two [3%]) and pneumonitis (two [3%]); and in group C, neutropenia (four [6%]) and pleural effusion (two [3%]). Two deaths were attributed to treatment: one due to pulmonary fibrosis in group B and one due to febrile neutropenia in group C. INTERPRETATION: The combination of abemaciclib, fulvestrant, and trastuzumab significantly improved progression-free survival versus standard-of-care chemotherapy plus trastuzumab while showing a tolerable safety profile. Our results suggest that a chemotherapy-free regimen might potentially be an alternative treatment option for patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Effects of the Fertility Drugs Clomiphene Citrate and Letrozole on Kiss-1 Expression in Hypothalamic Kiss-1-Expressing Cell Models.

Clomiphene citrate (CC) and letrozole stimulate the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis and are used widely as oral fertility drugs to induce folliculogenesis. We examined whether these drugs increase Kiss-1 expression in hypothalamic cell models. We utilized two hypothalamic cell models, mHypoA-50 and mHypoA-55, which originated from Kiss-1 neurons in the anteroventral periventricular (AVPV) nucleus and arcuate (ARC) nucleus of the mouse hypothalamus, respectively. The cells were stimulated with CC or letrozole, after which Kiss-1 mRNA expression was determined. CC stimulated Kiss-1 gene expression in mHypoA-50 and mHypoA-55 cells. The basal expression of Kiss-1 was significantly increased in the presence of estradiol (E2) in mHypoA-50 cells, and the CC-induced increase in Kiss-1 expression was not observed in the presence of E2 in these cells. In contrast, E2 did not modify the basal expression of Kiss-1 in mHypoA-55 cells, and CC-induced Kiss-1 expression was still observed in the presence of E2. The significant increase in Kiss-1 gene expression in mHypoA-50 and mHypoA-55 cells was blunted in the presence of estrogen receptor antagonists. Aromatase was expressed in mHypoA-50 and mHypoA-55 cells. Letrozole, an aromatase inhibitor, increased Kiss-1 expression in mHypoA-55 ARC cells but not in mHypoA-50 AVPV cells. Although the basal expression of Kiss-1 was increased by E2, letrozole did not modulate Kiss-1 expression in mHypoA-50 cells. Letrozole-induced Kiss-1 gene expression in mHypoA-55 cells was not modulated in the presence of E2. The fertility drugs CC and letrozole modulated Kiss-1 expression in hypothalamic cell models.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis of fulvestrant in preclinical models of breast cancer to assess the importance of its estrogen receptor-α degrader activity in antitumor efficacy.

PURPOSE: Fulvestrant is a selective estrogen receptor downregulator (SERD) that is approved for first- or second-line use as a single agent or in combination with cyclin dependent kinase or phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitors for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Fulvestrant exhibits exceptionally effective antitumor activity in preclinical models of breast cancer, a success that has been attributed to its robust SERD activity despite modest receptor downregulation in patient tumors. By modeling human exposures in animal models we probe the absolute need for SERD activity. METHODS: Three xenograft models of endocrine therapy-resistant breast cancer were used to evaluate the efficacy of fulvestrant administered in doses historically used in preclinical studies in the field or by using a dose regimen intended to model clinical exposure levels. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses were conducted to evaluate plasma exposure and intratumoral ER downregulation. RESULTS: A clinically relevant 25 mg/kg dose of fulvestrant exhibited antitumor efficacy comparable to the historically used 200 mg/kg dose, but at this lower dose it did not result in robust ER downregulation. Further, the antitumor efficacy of the lower dose of fulvestrant was comparable to that observed for other oral SERDs currently in development. CONCLUSION: The use of clinically unachievable exposure levels of fulvestrant as a benchmark in preclinical development of SERDs may negatively impact the selection of those molecules that are advanced for clinical development. Further, these studies suggest that antagonist efficacy, as opposed to SERD activity, is likely to be the primary driver of clinical response.

Metastatic breast cancer patients with lung or liver metastases should be distinguished before being treated with fulvestrant.

BACKGROUND: Endocrine therapy is the preferred treatment for patients with hormone receptor -positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). While visceral metastasis is a negative prognostic factor, few studies have distinguished between the prognoses of patients with metastases at different visceral sites. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 398 patients receiving fulvestrant 500 mg at a single center over a 6-year period were analyzed. Logistic regression models were used to identify the prognostic factors associated with progression-free survival (PFS). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare the PFS of patients with lung and liver metastases. RESULTS: Baseline visceral metastases were present in 233 patients, including 138 with lungw/o liver metastases (lung metastases without liver involvement), 51 with liverw/o lung metastases (liver metastases without lung involvement) and 41 with lung and liver metastases. The median PFS was 6.8 months (5.6 and 9.2 months for visceral and nonvisceral metastases, respectively, P = .028). PFS was longer in patients with lungw/o liver metastases than in those with liverw/o lung metastases or lung and liver metastases (9.6, 3.7 and 3.2 months, respectively, P < .001; liverw/o lung vs. lungw/o liver hazard ratio (HR) 1.70; lung and liver vs. lungw/o liver HR 2.85). Patients with liver metastases experienced significantly worse PFS than those without liver involvement (3.7 vs. 9.2 months, P < .001). PFS benefits were observed in patients with longer disease-free intervals, no liver metastases, and no previous chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Fulvestrant treatment benefited patients with lungw/o liver or nonvisceral metastases. When treating hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative MBC patients with endocrine therapy, it is important to differentiate patients with lung metastases from those with liver metastases.

Multicenter Observational Study of Fulvestrant 500 mg in Postmenopausal Japanese Women with Estrogen Receptor-Positive Advanced or Recurrent Breast Cancer after Prior Endocrine Treatment (SBCCSG29 Study).

BACKGROUND: Fulvestrant 500 mg has been an option for endocrine therapy for advanced or recurrent breast cancer after prior endocrine treatment since November 2011 in Japan. This study aimed to clarify the effectiveness and safety of fulvestrant 500 mg in clinical settings. METHODS: This was a multicenter, both prospective and retrospective, observational study of 132 postmenopausal women (median age 66) with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer, who had been treated with fulvestrant. Information from medical records was retrospectively obtained from 9 hospitals (Saitama Breast Cancer Clinical Study Group: SBCCSG) in Saitama prefecture, Japan, from October 2012 to April 2014. The primary end point was time to treatment failure (TTF). The secondary end points were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), and adverse events (AE) (CTCAE ver. 4). The choice of subsequent therapy after fulvestrant was also evaluated. RESULTS: The median TTF was 6.1 months. Median OS was 28.5 months (the starting date was the first day of fulvestrant). ORR was 12.9% and CBR was 45.5%. The most common AEs were injection site reactions (9.1%). The rate of grade 3 AE was only 2.3% (3/132). The number of patients who underwent subsequent therapy after fulvestrant were 54 (55.7%) receiving chemotherapy, 42 (43.3%) receiving non-fulvestrant endocrine therapy, and 1 (1%) receiving mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor (mTORi) + endocrine therapy (ET). CONCLUSION: Fulvestrant 500 mg is an effective and safe treatment for patients with advanced or recurrent breast cancer after prior endocrine treatment.

Selective oestrogen receptor degraders in breast cancer: a review and perspectives.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer accounts for 70% of all breast cancers. Sequential endocrine treatment in monotherapy or in combination with CDK 4/6 or m-TOR inhibitors is the mainstay of recommended treatment options in the management of metastatic breast cancer even in the presence of visceral metastasis. There is an emerging need to address endocrine resistance, which despite highly efficacious treatment combinations still can develop. RECENT FINDINGS: One of the mechanisms of endocrine resistance is molecular alteration of the oestrogen receptor itself, such as ESR1 mutations affecting the ligand-binding domain. These mutations emerge under the selective pressure of aromatase inhibitors. The efficacy of selective oestrogen receptor degraders (SERDs) might not be affected by the presence of molecular alterations of oestrogen receptor. Fulvestrant is the only SERD used in current clinical practice. Numerous novel, nonsteroidal orally available SERDs are currently in clinical development. Efficacious oestrogen receptor target engagement and promising clinical activity was shown in early phase clinical trials. SUMMARY: Therefore, a new class of orally available nonsteroidal SERDs gains high interest in tackling endocrine resistance in oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+) advanced breast cancer. Clinical efficacy needs to be confirmed in larger patient populations.

A meta-analysis of clinical benefit rates for fulvestrant 500 mg vs. alternative endocrine therapies for hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Fulvestrant, a selective estrogen receptor degrader, is approved for first- and second-line treatment of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer (ABC). METHODS: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating fulvestrant 500 mg in postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive ABC, to evaluate differences in clinical benefit rate (CBR; proportion of patients experiencing best overall response of complete response, partial response, or stable disease for ≥ 24 weeks) between fulvestrant 500 mg and comparator endocrine therapies. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for CBR were calculated; fixed effects (FE) models were constructed (first- and second-line data, alone and combined). RESULTS: Six RCTs were included. Four studies evaluated fulvestrant 500 mg vs. fulvestrant 250 mg; two evaluated fulvestrant 500 mg vs. anastrozole 1 mg. In total, 1054 and 534 patients were included (first- and second-line treatment, respectively). Analysis of OR and 95% CI of CBR by therapy line favored fulvestrant 500 mg vs. comparator therapy. Assessing all results combined in the FE model indicated significant improvement in CBR with fulvestrant 500 mg vs. comparator treatments (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.13-1.57; p = 0.001). Restricting the FE model to therapy line demonstrated significant improvement in CBR vs. comparator treatments (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.02-1.73; p = 0.035) for first-line, and a trend to improvement vs. comparator treatments (OR 1.27; 95% CI 0.90-1.79; p = 0.174) for second-line. CONCLUSIONS: In postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive ABC, fulvestrant 500 mg first-line was associated with significantly greater CBR (more patients benefiting from treatment) vs. comparator endocrine therapy.

Overall Survival with Fulvestrant plus Anastrozole in Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: We previously reported prolonged progression-free survival and marginally prolonged overall survival among postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer who had been randomly assigned to receive the aromatase inhibitor anastrozole plus the selective estrogen-receptor down-regulator fulvestrant, as compared with anastrozole alone, as first-line therapy. We now report final survival outcomes. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients to receive either anastrozole or fulvestrant plus anastrozole. Randomization was stratified according to adjuvant tamoxifen use. Analysis of survival was performed by means of two-sided stratified log-rank tests and Cox regression. Efficacy and safety were compared between the two groups, both overall and in subgroups. RESULTS: Of 707 patients who had undergone randomization, 694 had data available for analysis. The combination-therapy group had 247 deaths among 349 women (71%) and a median overall survival of 49.8 months, as compared with 261 deaths among 345 women (76%) and a median overall survival of 42.0 months in the anastrozole-alone group, a significant difference (hazard ratio for death, 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 0.98; P = 0.03 by the log-rank test). In a subgroup analysis of the two strata, overall survival among women who had not received tamoxifen previously was longer with the combination therapy than with anastrozole alone (median, 52.2 months and 40.3 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.92); among women who had received tamoxifen previously, overall survival was similar in the two groups (median, 48.2 months and 43.5 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.27) (P = 0.09 for interaction). The incidence of long-term toxic effects of grade 3 to 5 was similar in the two groups. Approximately 45% of the patients in the anastrozole-alone group crossed over to receive fulvestrant. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of fulvestrant to anastrozole was associated with increased long-term survival as compared with anastrozole alone, despite substantial crossover to fulvestrant after progression during therapy with anastrozole alone. The results suggest that the benefit was particularly notable in patients without previous exposure to adjuvant endocrine therapy. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00075764.).

Cell-Proliferation Imaging for Monitoring Response to CDK4/6 Inhibition Combined with Endocrine-Therapy in Breast Cancer: Comparison of [18F]FLT and [18F]ISO-1 PET/CT.

PURPOSE: Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors in combination with endocrine-therapy have emerged as an important regimen of care for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive metastatic breast cancer, although identifying predictive biomarkers remains a challenge. We assessed the ability of two PET-proliferation tracers, [18F]FLT and [18F]ISO-1, for evaluating response to CDK4/6-inhibitor (palbociclib) and ER-antagonist (fulvestrant). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: To determine the effect of CDK4/6 inhibition combined with estrogen-blockade, we assessed cell proliferation in six breast cancer cell lines after 1, 3, and 6 days of treatment with palbociclib and/or fulvestrant. These data were correlated to in vitro radiotracer assays and results were verified by longitudinal [18F]FLT and [18F]ISO-1 micro-PET imaging performed in MCF7 tumor-bearing mice. RESULTS: All palbociclib-sensitive cell lines showed decreased [18F]FLT accumulation and S-phase depletion after treatment, with both measures augmented by combination therapy. In contrast, these cells showed changes in [18F]ISO-1 analogue-binding and G0 arrest only after prolonged treatment. MicroPET imaging of MCF7 xenografts showed a significant decrease in [18F]FLT but no changes in [18F]ISO-1 uptake in all treated mice on day 3. On day 14, however, mice treated with combination therapy showed a significant decrease in [18F]ISO-1, corresponding to G0 arrest, while maintaining reduced [18F]FLT uptake, which corresponded to S-phase depletion. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest complementary roles of [18F]FLT and [18F]ISO-1 PET in evaluating tumor-proliferation after combined CDK4/6 inhibitor and endocrine therapy in breast cancer. [18F]FLT is more sensitive to immediate changes in S-phase, whereas [18F]ISO-1 can assess more delayed changes related to cell-cycle arrest and transition to G0 quiescence from combination therapy. These data suggest a potential role for early prediction of long-term response using these imaging biomarkers.

Alpelisib Plus Fulvestrant in PIK3CA-Altered and PIK3CA-Wild-Type Estrogen Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer: A Phase 1b Clinical Trial.

Importance: The phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway is frequently activated in patients with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+), endocrine therapy-resistant breast cancers. Objective: To assess the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and activity of alpelisib, an oral, PI3Kα-specific inhibitor, plus fulvestrant in patients with ER+ advanced breast cancer (ABC). Design, Setting, and Participants: An open-label, single-arm, phase 1b study of alpelisib plus fulvestrant was conducted at 10 centers in 5 countries. Participants were 87 postmenopausal women with PIK3CA-altered or PIK3CA-wild-type ER+ ABC, whose cancer progressed during or after antiestrogen therapy. The study began enrolling patients October 5, 2010, and the data cutoff was March 22, 2017. Interventions: Escalating doses of alpelisib were administered once daily, starting at 300 mg, plus fixed-dose fulvestrant, 500 mg, in the dose-escalation phase; alpelisib at the recommended phase 2 dose plus fulvestrant in the dose-expansion phase. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was determination of the MTD of once-daily alpelisib plus fulvestrant. Secondary end points included safety and preliminary activity. Results: From October 5, 2010, to March 22, 2017, 87 women (median age: 58 years [range, 37-79 years]; median of 5 prior lines of antineoplastic therapy) received escalating once-daily doses of alpelisib (300 mg, n = 9; 350 mg, n = 8; 400 mg, n = 70) plus fixed-dose fulvestrant (500 mg). During dose escalation, dose-limiting toxic effects were reported in 1 patient (alpelisib, 400 mg): diarrhea (grade 2), vomiting, fatigue, and decreased appetite (all grade 3). The MTD of alpelisib when combined with fulvestrant was 400 mg once daily, and the recommended phase 2 dose was 300 mg once daily. Overall, the most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events with alpelisib, 400 mg, once daily (≥10% of patients), regardless of causality, were hyperglycemia (19 [22%]) and maculopapular rash (11 [13%]); 9 patients permanently discontinued therapy owing to adverse events. Median progression-free survival at the MTD was 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.6-9.0 months). Median progression-free survival with alpelisib, 300 to 400 mg, once daily plus fulvestrant was longer in patients with PIK3CA-altered tumors (9.1 months; 95% CI, 6.6-14.6 months) vs wild-type tumors (4.7 months; 95% CI, 1.9-5.6 months). Overall response rate in the PIK3CA-altered group was 29% (95% CI, 17%-43%), with no objective tumor responses in the wild-type group. Conclusions and Relevance: Alpelisib plus fulvestrant has a manageable safety profile in patients with ER+ ABC, and data suggest that this combination may have greater clinical activity in PIK3CA-altered vs wild-type tumors. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01219699.

A transcriptomics model of estrogen action in the ovine fetal hypothalamus: evidence for estrogenic effects of ICI 182,780.

Estradiol plays a critical role in stimulating the fetal hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis at the end of gestation. Estradiol action is mediated through nuclear and membrane receptors that can be modulated by ICI 182,780, a pure antiestrogen compound. The objective of this study was to evaluate the transcriptomic profile of estradiol and ICI 182,780, testing the hypothesis that ICI 182,780 antagonizes the action of estradiol in the fetal hypothalamus. Chronically catheterized ovine fetuses were infused for 48 h with: vehicle (Control, n = 6), 17ß-estradiol 500 µg/kg/day (Estradiol, n = 4), ICI 182,780 5 µg/kg/day (ICI 5 µg, n = 4) and ICI 182,780 5 mg/kg/day (ICI 5 mg, n = 5). Fetal hypothalami were collected afterward, and gene expression was measured through microarray. Statistical analysis of transcriptomic data was performed with Bioconductor-R and Cytoscape software. Unexpectedly, 35% and 15.5% of the upregulated differentially expressed genes (DEG) by Estradiol significantly overlapped (P < 0.05) with upregulated DEG by ICI 5 mg and ICI 5 µg, respectively. For the downregulated DEG, these percentages were 29.9% and 15.5%, respectively. There was almost no overlap for DEG following opposite directions between Estradiol and ICI ICI 5 mg or ICI 5 µg. Furthermore, most of the genes in the estrogen signaling pathway - after activation of the epidermal growth factor receptor - followed the same direction in Estradiol, ICI 5 µg or ICI 5 mg compared to Control. In conclusion, estradiol and ICI 182,780 have estrogenic genomic effects in the developing brain, suggesting the possibility that the major action of estradiol on the fetal hypothalamus involves another receptor system rather than estrogen receptors.

Discovery of Selective Estrogen Receptor Covalent Antagonists for the Treatment of ERαWT and ERαMUT Breast Cancer.

Mutations in estrogen receptor alpha (ERα) that confer resistance to existing classes of endocrine therapies are detected in up to 30% of patients who have relapsed during endocrine treatments. Because a significant proportion of therapy-resistant breast cancer metastases continue to be dependent on ERα signaling, there remains a critical need to develop the next generation of ERα antagonists that can overcome aberrant ERα activity. Through our drug-discovery efforts, we identified H3B-5942, which covalently inactivates both wild-type and mutant ERα by targeting Cys530 and enforcing a unique antagonist conformation. H3B-5942 belongs to a class of ERα antagonists referred to as selective estrogen receptor covalent antagonists (SERCA). In vitro comparisons of H3B-5942 with standard-of-care (SoC) and experimental agents confirmed increased antagonist activity across a panel of ERαWT and ERαMUT cell lines. In vivo, H3B-5942 demonstrated significant single-agent antitumor activity in xenograft models representing ERαWT and ERαY537S breast cancer that was superior to fulvestrant. Lastly, H3B-5942 potency can be further improved in combination with CDK4/6 or mTOR inhibitors in both ERαWT and ERαMUT cell lines and/or tumor models. In summary, H3B-5942 belongs to a class of orally available ERα covalent antagonists with an improved profile over SoCs.Significance: Nearly 30% of endocrine therapy-resistant breast cancer metastases harbor constitutively activating mutations in ERα. SERCA H3B-5942 engages C530 of both ERαWT and ERαMUT, promotes a unique antagonist conformation, and demonstrates improved in vitro and in vivo activity over SoC agents. Importantly, single-agent efficacy can be further enhanced by combining with CDK4/6 or mTOR inhibitors. Cancer Discov; 8(9); 1176-93. ©2018 AACR.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1047.

Fulvestrant for the treatment of advanced breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The current issues with endocrine therapy for treatment of advanced breast cancer include balance of efficacy of therapy versus tolerability as well as hormone resistance. The efficacy of fulvestrant, a selective oestrogen receptor degrader (SERD), has been demonstrated in hormone receptor positive patients previously untreated or treated with hormonal therapy. Areas covered: This article discusses the journey of fulvestrant licensing, its efficacy in combination with other endocrine therapies and the future role it may have within breast cancer treatment. Expert commentary: Within phase III trials, fulvestrant has demonstrated equivalent or improved clinical efficacy when compared with established endocrine agents. In the recent decade, fulvestrant has achieved licensing as a second line agent in non-operative advanced breast cancer at initially 250mg, increasing to 500mg. Presently, fulvestrant is licensed globally as first line endocrine management for advanced breast cancer in post-menopausal women. Early combination trials of fulvestrant and cyclin dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors have demonstrated good clinical efficacy with improved progression free survival when compared to fulvestrant alone.

Selective oestrogen receptor antagonists inhibit oesophageal cancer cell proliferation in vitro.

BACKGROUND: Oestrogen receptors (ER) have a well-established role to the initiation, progression and regulation of responses to treatment of breast, prostate, and lung cancers. Previous data indicates altered ER expression in oesophageal cancers (OC). However the role of ER subtypes and ER specific inhibitors in the regulation of OC progression remains unclear. This study sought to assess levels of ERα and ERß in OC. The effects of highly selective ER antagonists on cell proliferation and apoptosis in two OC adenocarcinoma cell lines was also studied. METHODS: ERα and ERß expression profiling in paired normal oesophageal mucosa and tumour tissues (n = 34; adenocarcinoma n = 28; squamous cell carcinoma n = 6) was performed using quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). Correlation between levels of ER with the clinico-pathological features for OC was determined. The effect of selective ER antagonists on proliferation of OE33 and OE19 OC cell lines was studied. RESULTS: ERα and ERß mRNA expression was significantly higher (p < 0.05) in tumour tissues relative to their paired normal mucosa and correlated inversely with survival outcome (p < 0.05). Upregulation of ERα mRNA correlated with higher pathological T-stage (p < 0.05) and lymph node metastasis (p < 0.05) while ERß mRNA upregulation correlated with positive vascular invasion (p < 0.05). A significant concentration-dependent inhibition of proliferation in OE33 and OE19 cell lines was induced by a highly-selective ERα antagonist (MPP) and an ERß specific antagonist (PHTPP) (p < 0.05). Moreover, anti-oestrogens induced cell death through stimulation of apoptotic caspase activity. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that the ER system is involved in OC progression and thus may provide a novel target for the treatment of OC.

Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) and selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs) in cancer treatment.

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in women, with estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer making up approximately 75% of all breast cancers diagnosed. Given the dependence on active ER signaling in these tumors, the predominant treatment strategy has been to inhibit various aspects of this pathway including directly antagonizing ER with the use of selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) and selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs). Interestingly, the dependence on ER for breast cancer growth is often retained even after progression through several lines of antiestrogen therapy, making ER a bonafide biomarker for this cancer subtype and driving the continued research and development of novel ER-targeted therapeutics to treat this patient population. This, combined with the continuous discovery of mechanisms underlying endocrine resistance, is resulting in a continually evolving treatment landscape for ER+ breast cancer. This review discusses various ER antagonists investigated for the treatment of breast cancer, outlining their pharmacological and tissue-specific mechanisms of action as well as their specified use within the ER+ breast cancer setting. In addition, mechanisms of resistance to SERMs and SERDs, the use of ER antagonists in combination therapy strategies, and the ongoing development of novel drugs are also reviewed in the context of the changing clinical landscape of ER+ breast cancer. Lastly, the role of SERMs and SERDs in non-breast cancer indications is also discussed.