RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Olaparib is effective in metastatic triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) carrying germline mutations in DNA damage repair (DDR) genes BRCA1/2 (gBRCA-mut). The OLTRE window-of-opportunity trial preliminarily investigated potential pathologic, radiometabolic and immune biomarkers of early-response to olaparib in gBRCA-wild-type (wt) TNBC and, as proof-of-concept in gBRCA-mut HER2-negative BC. METHODS: Patients received olaparib for 3 weeks (3w) before standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy and underwent multiple FDG18-PET/CT scan (basal, after olaparib), clinical assessments (basal, every 3w), tumor biopsies and blood samplings (baseline, after olaparib). Clinical and radiometabolic responses were evaluated according to RECIST1.1 and PERCIST criteria. RESULTS: 27 patients with gBRCA-wt TNBC and 8 with gBRCA-mut BC (6 TNBC, 2 HR+/HER2-negative) were enrolled. Three (11.1%) patients showed mutations in non-BRCA1/2 DDR genes and 4 (14.8%) in other genes. 3w olaparib induced 16/35 and 15/27 partial clinical and radiometabolic responses, including in 40.7% and 50.0% gBRCA-wt patients. gBRCA-mut tumors presented numerically higher tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) levels and PD-L1 positive tumors. Clinical responders experienced a reduction in T-regs/T-eff ratio (p=0.05), B and NK lymphocytes (p=0.003 both), with an average increase in T-helpers rate (p<0.001) and CD4/CD8 ratio (p=0.02). Ki67% and TILs did not vary significantly (p=0.67 and p=0.77). A numerical increase in PD-L1 positive cases after olaparib was observed, though non-significant (p=0.134). No differences were observed according to gBRCA status and type of response. CONCLUSIONS: Early-stage TNBC might be a target population for olaparib, irrespective of gBRCA mutations. Future trials should combine TILs, PD-L1 and gBRCA status to better identify candidates for escalated/de-escalated treatment strategies including olaparib.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: mTOR inhibitor everolimus is used for hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC). No reliable predictive biomarker of response is available. Following evidences from other solid tumors, we aimed to assess the association between treatment-associated immune system features and everolimus activity. METHODS: We retrospectively explored a correlation with the therapeutic activity of everolimus and tumor-associated immune pathways with ingenuity pathway analysis (IPA), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), circulating lymphocytes, and endothelial cells (CECs) in 3 different HR+ mBC studies, including the BALLET phase IIIb study. RESULTS: The circulating levels of CD3+/CD8+, CD3+/CD4+, and overall T lymphocytes were higher in responders versus non-responders at baseline (p = 0.017, p < 0.001, p = 0.034) and after treatment (p = 0.01, p = 0.003, p = 0.023). Reduced CECs, a tumor neoangiogenesis marker, were observed in responders after treatment (p < 0.001). Patients with low NLR (≤ 4.4) showed a better progression-free survival compared to patients with high NLR (> 4.4) (p = 0.01). IPA showed that the majority of immunity-related genes were found upregulated in responders compared to non-responders before treatment, but not after. CONCLUSIONS: Lymphocytes subpopulations, CECs and NLR could be interesting biomarkers predictive of response to everolimus-based regimens, potentially useful in daily clinical practice to select/monitor everolimus-based treatment in mBC. Further studies to confirm such hypotheses are warranted.
