Activity and safety of enobosarm, a novel, oral, selective androgen receptor modulator, in androgen receptor-positive, oestrogen receptor-positive, and HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (Study G200802): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, multinational, parallel design, phase 2 trial

TFDP1 drives triple-negative breast Cancer development through senescence suppression and serves as a therapeutic target for topotecan

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) constitutes the molecular subtype exhibiting the poorest prognosis. Targeted therapy emerges as a pivotal strategy to enhance the clinical outcomes of individuals with TNBC. Identifying targets and corresponding therapeutic agents is essential for reducing TNBC-related mortality. Topotecan, a chemotherapeutic agent approved for treating metastatic breast cancer, remains under investigation regarding its specific targets and molecular mechanisms in TNBC. Data procured from CRISPR/Cas9 library screenings showed that TFDP1 may be a therapeutic target in TNBC, and the L1000FWD database suggested that TFDP1 serves as a potential target of topotecan. The overexpression of TFDP1 was observed in TNBC tissues, correlating with poorer prognosis. Knockdown of TFDP1 inhibited the cell growth, clonal expansion, and tumorigenicity of TNBC cells. Mechanistically, TFDP1 inhibited cellular senescence in TNBC cells. In vitro experiments demonstrated that topotecan inhibited TNBC cell growth and promoted cellular senescence, counteracting the effects of TFDP1 overexpression on TNBC cells. These findings suggest that topotecan impedes TNBC cell growth by targeting TFDP1. This interaction provides valuable insights into the molecular mechanisms governing TNBC cell senescence, presenting TFDP1 as a potential therapeutic target. Combining topotecan with senolytic therapies may offer a promising strategy for TNBC treatment.

Treating ER-positive breast cancer: a review of the current FDA-approved SERMs and SERDs and their mechanisms of action

Breast cancer is one of the most significant causes of mortality among women and the second most prevalent cancer worldwide. Estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancers are the most common molecular subtype of breast cancer, comprising about 70% of breast carcinoma diagnoses worldwide. Endocrine therapy is the foremost strategy for the treatment of ER-positive breast cancer. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved endocrine therapies for ER-positive breast cancers that include selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), selective estrogen receptor downregulators/degraders (SERDs) and aromatase inhibitors (AIs). The approved SERMS, tamoxifen, toremifene and raloxifene, are the gold-standard treatments. The only FDA-approved SERD available for treating ER and hormone-positive breast cancers is fulvestrant, and various generations of AIs, including exemestane, letrozole, and anastrozole, have also received FDA approval. Herein, we review the major FDA-approved SERMs and SERDs for treating ER-positive breast cancer, focusing on their mechanisms of action. We also explore molecular events that contribute to the resistance of these drugs to endocrine therapies and combinational strategies with drugs such as cyclin-dependant kinases 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors in clinical trials to combat endocrine drug resistance.

Evaluation of the androgen receptor in patients with ERα-positive early breast cancer treated with adjuvant tamoxifen ± fluoxymesterone

BACKGROUND

Our goal was to evaluate the impact of level of androgen receptor (AR) expression on outcomes in women with estrogen receptor α (ER) positive breast cancer. We sought to corroborate our preclinical findings that AR-agonists were efficacious in patients with ER-positive tumors that also expressed high levels of AR.

METHODS

Tissue microarrays (TMAs) were prepared from primary tumor blocks from patients entered on a prospective randomized adjuvant trial of tamoxifen (Tam) alone or combined with fluoxymesterone (Flu), an AR-agonist, (NCCTG 89-30-52). TMAs were stained for ER and AR and expression examined in decile increments (0-100%) of positive invasive tumor nuclei. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival (RFS).

RESULTS

301 (59%) of the 514 patients had sufficient tissue to determine ER and AR expression, where nuclear staining of > 70% was considered "enriched" and nuclear staining of ≤ 70% was considered "poor/moderate". Eleven (4%) of these patients had poor/moderate ER staining and were excluded from these analyses. The proportion of the ER-enriched tumors that also had AR-enriched expression levels was 56.3% in the Tam arm and 51.8% in the Tam + Flu arm. Within the AR-enriched patients, the cumulative incidence of RFS events showed an advantage for Tam + Flu over Tam alone that reached significance (Gray's test p = 0.0472).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that an AR-agonist may be of value in AR-enriched, ER-enriched breast cancers and should be studied in future trials because of the availability of new, more tolerable AR-agonists.

Sex hormones, the anticancer immune response, and therapeutic opportunities

Sex-based differences have been observed in the incidence and prognosis of various cancers, as well as in the response to immune check point inhibitors (ICIs). These disparities are partially attributed to sex-based differences in the molecular characteristics of the anticancer immune response, which are largely influenced by sex hormones. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview on how sex hormones affect innate and adaptive immunity and contribute to shaping the features of tumor immune microenvironment and response to anticancer immunotherapy. We also discuss the promising potential and challenges of combining sex hormone manipulation with anticancer immunotherapy as new therapeutic strategy. We surmise that a sex-based perspective should be part of precision medicine approaches, and sex hormones manipulation provides opportunities for innovative immune therapeutic approaches.

Darolutamide or capecitabine in triple-negative, androgen receptor-positive, advanced breast cancer (UCBG 3-06 START): a multicentre, non-comparative, randomised, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

We proposed in 2005 that androgens replace oestrogens as the driver steroids in a subgroup of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) with androgen receptor (AR) expression called molecular apocrine (MA) or luminal androgen receptor (LAR). Here, we report the analysis of a clinical trial evaluating the antitumour activity of the anti-androgen darolutamide in MA breast cancer. Our aim was to assess the clinical benefit in patients with AR-positive TNBCs defined by immunohistochemistry and by RNA profiling.

METHODS

In this multicentre, non-comparative, randomised, phase 2 trial, women aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 and with advanced TNBC that was previously treated with a maximum of one line of chemotherapy were recruited from 45 hospitals in France. After central confirmation of TNBC status and AR positivity (≥10%; SP107 antibody), participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive darolutamide 600 mg orally twice daily or capecitabine minimum 1000 mg/m2 twice daily for 2 weeks on and 1 week off, until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, lost to follow-up, or withdrawal of consent. Randomisation was done centrally using the minimisation procedure and was stratified according to the number of previous lines of chemotherapy. Transcriptomic analysis was used to classify tumours into groups with high and low AR activity (MAhigh and MAlow). The primary clinical endpoint was clinical benefit rate at 16 weeks (confirmed complete response, partial response, or stable disease). The primary translational endpoint was clinical benefit rate in the darolutamide group in MAhigh tumours versus all other tumours. Analyses were done per protocol. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03383679), and is closed to recruitment.

FINDINGS

Between April 9, 2018, and July 20, 2021, 254 women were screened and 94 were randomly assigned to darolutamide (n=61) or capecitabine (n=33), of whom 90 were evaluable for efficacy analyses. Median follow-up at the data cutoff on July 20, 2022, was 22·5 months (IQR 16·5-30·5). The clinical benefit rate was 29% (17 of 58; 90% CI 19-39) with darolutamide and 59% (19 of 32; 90% CI 45-74) with capecitabine. In patients treated with darolutamide, the clinical benefit rate was 57% (12 of 21; 95% CI 36-78) in MAhigh tumours, and 16% (five of 31; 95% CI 3-29; p=0·0020) in other tumours. The most common grade 3 adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (none of 60 in the darolutamide group vs two [6%] of 33 in the capecitabine group), and headache (three [5%] vs none). No grade 4 or 5 adverse events were observed. Drug-related serious adverse events occurred in three (5%) patients in the darolutamide group and three (9%) in the capecitabine group, which were toxicoderma (n=1) and headache (n=2) in the darolutamide group, and diarrhoea, general physical deterioration, and hepatic cytolysis in the capecitabine group (n=1 each).

INTERPRETATION

This study did not reach its prespecified endpoint for darolutamide activity in patients with triple-negative breast cancer selected on the basis of immunohistochemistry for AR. Further studies selecting patients based on RNA profiling might allow better identification of tumours sensitive to anti-androgens.

FUNDING

Bayer and Fondation Bergonié.

Transcription factors and hormone receptors: Sex‑specific targets for cancer therapy (Review)

Despite advancements in diagnostic and therapeutic technologies, cancer continues to pose a challenge to disease-free longevity in humans. Numerous factors contribute to the onset and progression of cancer, among which sex differences, as an intrinsic biological condition, warrant further attention. The present review summarizes the roles of hormone receptors estrogen receptor α (ERα), estrogen receptor β (ERβ) and androgen receptor (AR) in seven types of cancer: Breast, prostate, ovarian, lung, gastric, colon and liver cancer. Key cancer-related transcription factors known to be activated through interactions with these hormone receptors have also been discussed. To assess the impact of sex hormone receptors on different cancer types, hormone-related transcription factors were analyzed using the SignaLink 3.0 database. Further analysis focused on six key transcription factors: CCCTC-binding factor, forkhead box A1, retinoic acid receptor α, PBX homeobox 1, GATA binding protein 2 and CDK inhibitor 1A. The present review demonstrates that these transcription factors significantly influence hormone receptor activity across various types of cancer, and elucidates the complex interactions between these transcription factors and hormone receptors, offering new insights into their roles in cancer progression. The findings suggest that targeting these common transcription factors could improve the efficacy of hormone therapy and provide a unified approach to treating various types of cancer. Understanding the dual and context-dependent roles of these transcription factors deepens the current understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying hormone-driven tumor progression and could lead to more effective targeted therapeutic strategies.

Androgen receptor signalling in non-prostatic malignancies: challenges and opportunities

The androgen receptor (AR) signalling pathway has been intensively studied in the context of prostate cancer, where androgen deprivation therapy is part of the standard of care for metastatic disease. By contrast, fewer studies have investigated the impact and translational potential of targeting AR in other cancer types where it is also expressed and functional. In this Review, we discuss the current understanding of AR in non-prostatic cancer types and summarize ongoing AR-directed clinical trials. While different androgen levels contribute to sexual dimorphism in cancer, targeting the AR system could benefit both sexes and help overcome resistance to targeted therapies. However, a bimodal function of AR signalling, which suppresses stromal changes associated with the early stages of cancer development, also needs to be considered. Future research is necessary to scrutinize cellular and molecular mechanisms of action of AR in cancer cells and the tumour microenvironment, to develop selective modulators of AR activity, and to identify patients with non-prostatic cancer who might benefit from targeting this pathway. AR-directed manipulation of host immune cells may offer a promising therapeutic approach for many types of cancers.

Beyond Hormone Receptors: liquid biopsy tools to unveil new clinical meanings and empower therapeutic decision-making in Luminal-like metastatic breast cancer

Immunohistochemical (IHC) tissue profiling is a standard practice in the management of metastatic breast cancer (mBC), that enables the identification of distinct biological phenotypes based on hormone receptors' expression. Luminal-like tumors primarily benefit from a first line treatment strategy combining endocrine therapy and cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors. However, IHC analyses necessitate invasive procedures and may encounter technical and interpretational challenges. In the current era of precision medicine, liquid biopsy holds potential to provide clinicians with additional insights into disease biology, including mechanisms underlying endocrine resistance and disease progression. Several liquid-based biomarkers are entering clinical practice and hold prognostic and predictive values in Luminal-like mBC, while many others are currently being investigated. The present work aims to summarize the current evidence regarding the clinical meanings of hormone receptors and their downstream molecular pathways, alongside their implications for therapeutic decision-making in Luminal-like mBC.

Are androgen receptor agonists a treatment option in bladder cancer?

Sex-related differences in bladder cancer incidence and progression infer a role for sex hormones and their cognate receptors in this disease. In part due to the oncogenic role of androgen receptor signaling in prostate cancer, the focus of most preclinical and clinical research to-date has been on the potential pro-tumorigenic action of androgens in urothelial cancers. However, clinical studies of androgen receptor antagonism have yielded minimal success. In this review, we explore the tumor suppressor role of androgen receptor in bladder cancer and discuss how it might be harnessed therapeutically.

The combination of focal breast edema and adjacent vessel sign to assess the behavior of mass-type invasive ductal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to investigate the association between focal breast edema (FBE) and adjacent vessel sign (AVS) with tumor size, histologic grade, lymphovascular invasion, axillary lymph node status, Ki-67 index, and molecular subtype in breast cancer. These findings have provided valuable insights into the biological characteristics and prognosis of mass-type invasive ductal carcinoma (M-IDC).

METHODS

We retrospectively included patients with M-IDC between January 2016 and December 2021. FBE was evaluated using T2-weighted sequence. AVS was assessed using maximum-intensity projection images obtained using early dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. The breast peritumor score (BPS) was defined as follows: BPS 1, absence of both edema and AVS; BPS 2, AVS without edema; BPS 3, AVS with peritumoral edema; BPS 4, AVS with prepectoral edema; and BPS 5, AVS with subcutaneous edema. The correlation between different BPS scores and clinicopathological variables was examined using Kendall's tau-b correlation coefficient. The DeLong test was used to compare the performances of three clinicopathological models combined with peritumoral features (FBE, AVS, and BPS) in predicting luminal A-like M-IDC.

RESULTS

In 228 patients with M-IDC, BPS was positively correlated with tumor size, histologic grade, lymphovascular invasion, axillary lymph node status, Ki-67 index, and negatively correlated with estrogen receptor expression (all P < 0.05). Furthermore, BPS 1 was more likely to be present in patients with luminal A-like breast cancer (P < 0.001). Among the three prediction models, the clinicopathological model combined with the BPS model demonstrated superior diagnostic performance for luminal A-like breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The BPS is a valuable, non-invasive biomarker for assessing the aggressiveness of M-IDC and can facilitate treatment planning.

A High-Throughput Immune-Oncology Screen Identifies Immunostimulatory Properties of Cytotoxic Chemotherapy Agents in TNBC

Background: Triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs) typically have a greater immune cell infiltrate and are more likely to respond to immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) than ER+ or HER2+ breast cancers. However, there is a crucial need to optimize combining chemotherapy strategies with ICI to enhance overall survival in TNBC. Methods: Therefore, we developed a high-throughput co-culture screening assay to identify compounds that enhance CD8+ T-cell-mediated tumor cell cytotoxicity. Over 400 FDA-approved compounds or agents under investigation for oncology indications were included in the screening library. Results: Four chemotherapy agents were chosen as priority hits for mechanistic follow-up due to their ability to enhance T-cell-mediated cytotoxicity at multiple doses and multiple time points: paclitaxel, bleomycin sulfate, ispinesib, and etoposide. Lead compounds affected the expression of MHCI, MHCII, and PD-L1 and induced markers of immunogenic cell death (extracellular ATP or HMGB1). Conclusions: Based on the ability to increase tumor cell susceptibility to T-cell-mediated cytotoxicity while minimizing T-cell toxicity, bleomycin was identified as the most promising lead candidate. Overall, the results of these studies provide mechanistic insight into potential new chemotherapy partners to enhance anti-PD-1 efficacy in TNBC patients.

Guidance for Canadian Breast Cancer Practice: National Consensus Recommendations for Clinical Staging of Patients Newly Diagnosed with Breast Cancer

The accurate staging of breast cancer is fundamental for guiding treatment decisions and predicting patient outcomes. However, there can be considerable variation in routine clinical practice based on individual interpretation of guidelines and depending on the healthcare provider initially involved in working up patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer, ranging from primary care providers, triage nurses, surgeons, and/or oncologists. The optimal approach for clinical staging, particularly in asymptomatic patients presenting with intermediate-risk disease, remains a topic of dialogue among clinicians. Given this area of uncertainty, the Research Excellence, Active Leadership (REAL) Canadian Breast Cancer Alliance conducted a modified Delphi process to assess the level of agreement among Canadian expert clinicians on various staging recommendations. In total, 20 items were drafted covering staging based on biological status, the utilization of localization clips, both for the axilla during diagnosis and primary surgical site for margins and radiation therapy planning, and the use of advanced imaging for the investigation of distant metastases. Overall, the consensus threshold among all participants (i.e., ≥75% agreement) was reached in 20/20 items. Differences in clinical practice and recent findings from the literature are provided in the discussion. These consensus recommendations are meant to help standardize breast cancer staging practices in Canada, ensuring accurate diagnosis and optimal treatment planning.

Multi-stage mechanisms of tumor metastasis and therapeutic strategies

The cascade of metastasis in tumor cells, exhibiting organ-specific tendencies, may occur at numerous phases of the disease and progress under intense evolutionary pressures. Organ-specific metastasis relies on the formation of pre-metastatic niche (PMN), with diverse cell types and complex cell interactions contributing to this concept, adding a new dimension to the traditional metastasis cascade. Prior to metastatic dissemination, as orchestrators of PMN formation, primary tumor-derived extracellular vesicles prepare a fertile microenvironment for the settlement and colonization of circulating tumor cells at distant secondary sites, significantly impacting cancer progression and outcomes. Obviously, solely intervening in cancer metastatic sites passively after macrometastasis is often insufficient. Early prediction of metastasis and holistic, macro-level control represent the future directions in cancer therapy. This review emphasizes the dynamic and intricate systematic alterations that occur as cancer progresses, illustrates the immunological landscape of organ-specific PMN creation, and deepens understanding of treatment modalities pertinent to metastasis, thereby identifying some prognostic and predictive biomarkers favorable to early predict the occurrence of metastasis and design appropriate treatment combinations.

Clinical and immune responses to neoadjuvant fulvestrant with or without enzalutamide in ER+/Her2- breast cancer

Most ER+ breast cancers (BC) express androgen receptors (AR). This randomized phase II trial of 4 months of neoadjuvant fulvestrant (Fulv) alone or with enzalutamide (Combo) assessed whether adding AR blockade to Fulv would limit residual tumor at the time of surgery, as measured by modified preoperative endocrine predictive index (PEPI) score. Eligible patients were women with ER+/HER2- primary BC cT2 or greater. Stratification factors were clinical node and T-stage. Fresh tumor biopsies were required at study entry, after 4 weeks on therapy (W5), and at surgery. Laboratory analyses on tumors included immunochemistry (IHC) for ER/PR/AR/GR and Ki67 protein, evaluation of gene expression, multiplex for myeloid lineage immune cells, reverse-phase protein array, and plasma metabolomic analyses. Of 69 consented patients, 59 were evaluable. Toxicity was as expected with endocrine therapy. Combo achieved PEPI = 0 more frequently (24%: 8/33) than Fulv (8%: 2/26). Ki67 was ≤10% across arms by W5 in 76% of tumors. Activation of mTOR pathway proteins was elevated in tumors with poor Ki67 response. Tumors in both arms showed decreased estrogen-regulated and cell division gene sets, while Combo arm tumors uniquely exhibited enrichment of immune activation gene sets, including interferon gamma, complement, inflammation, antigen processing, and B and T cell activation. Multiplex IHC showed significantly reduced tumor-associated macrophages and CD14+/HLADR-/CD68- MDSCs in Combo tumors at W5. In summary, Combo tumors showed a higher PEPI = 0 response, Ki67 response, and more activated tumor immune microenvironment than Fulv. The odds of response were 4.6-fold higher for patients with ILC versus IDC. (Trial registration: This trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov ( https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02955394?id=16-1042&rank=1 ). The trial registration number is NCT02955394. The full trial protocol is available under Study Details at the Clinicaltrials.gov link provided).

Advances in the understanding of androgen receptor structure and function and in the development of next-generation AR-targeted therapeutics

Androgen receptor (AR) and its ligand androgens are important for development and physiology of various tissues. AR and its ligands also play critical role in the development of various diseases, making it a valuable therapeutic target. AR ligands, both agonists and antagonists, are being widely used to treat pathological conditions, including prostate cancer and hypogonadism. Despite AR being studied widely over the last five decades, the last decade has seen striking advances in the knowledge on AR and discoveries that have the potential to translate to the clinic. This review provides an overview of the advances in AR biology, AR molecular mechanisms of action, and next generation molecules that are currently in development. Several of the areas described in the review are just unraveling and the next decade will bring more clarity on these developments that will put AR at the forefront of both basic biology and drug development.

A molecular switch from tumor suppressor to oncogene in ER+ve breast cancer: Role of androgen receptor, JAK-STAT, and lineage plasticity

Cancers develop resistance to inhibitors of oncogenes mainly due to target-centric mechanisms such as mutations and splicing. While inhibitors or antagonists force targets to unnatural conformation contributing to protein instability and resistance, activating tumor suppressors may maintain the protein in an agonistic conformation to elicit sustainable growth inhibition. Due to the lack of tumor suppressor agonists, this hypothesis and the mechanisms underlying resistance are not understood. In estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer (BC), androgen receptor (AR) is a druggable tumor suppressor offering a promising avenue for this investigation. Spatial genomics suggests that the molecular portrait of AR-expressing BC cells in tumor microenvironment corresponds to better overall patient survival, clinically confirming AR's role as a tumor suppressor. Ligand activation of AR in ER-positive BC xenografts reprograms cistromes, inhibits oncogenic pathways, and promotes cellular elasticity toward a more differentiated state. Sustained AR activation results in cistrome rearrangement toward transcription factor PROP paired-like homeobox 1, transformation of AR into oncogene, and activation of the Janus kinase/signal transducer (JAK/STAT) pathway, all culminating in lineage plasticity to an aggressive resistant subtype. While the molecular profile of AR agonist-sensitive tumors corresponds to better patient survival, the profile represented in the resistant phenotype corresponds to shorter survival. Inhibition of activated oncogenes in resistant tumors reduces growth and resensitizes them to AR agonists. These findings indicate that persistent activation of a context-dependent tumor suppressor may lead to resistance through lineage plasticity-driven tumor metamorphosis. Our work provides a framework to explore the above phenomenon across multiple cancer types and underscores the importance of factoring sensitization of tumor suppressor targets while developing agonist-like drugs.

The implications of hormone treatment for cancer risk, screening and treatment in transgender individuals

There is evidence that gender-affirming hormone treatment (GAHT) for transgender individuals modulates their risk for specific malignancies including breast and prostate cancer, and meningiomas. However, there is insufficient data to make precise risk estimates accounting for age and inherited cancer risk. As such, screening recommendations remain broad. Even less evidence exists for best practice in the management of active or historical cancers in the transgender population. Guidance is therefore mainly extrapolated from cisgender populations but with considerations of the significant benefits of GAHT in the face of any hormonal risk. Clinical experience, the multidisciplinary team and shared decision making with the patient are vital in providing person-centred care, while further research is acquired.

Evidence of ostarine excretion in oral fluid after a single controlled oral administration

The presence of ostarine, a selective androgen receptor modulator (SARM) in an athlete's urine specimen constitutes one of the most frequent anti-doping rules violation as the drug is listed as a member of the S1.2 class "other anabolic agents" of the World Anti-doping Agency Prohibited List, forbidden in- and out-competition. It is possible to challenge this violation but it is at the charge of the athlete to prove innocence. The conditions to evidence no fault or negligence are mostly based on 2 points: 1. the athlete must present verified circumstances of contamination and the source of contamination must be identified; and 2. there must be verified claims by the athlete that the violation was not intentional. Some months before the Olympic games, a female athlete was suspended by a national anti-doping agency because of an adverse analytical finding for ostarine. She claimed that her violation was due to drug transfer when kissing her boyfriend, who did not inform her about his ostarine daily intake. To document this claim (excretion of ostarine in oral fluid in sufficient amounts), a male volunteer ingested 17.3 mg of ostarine (dose verified by 1H NMR). Oral fluid was collected over 8 h using the NeoSal™ collection device and was tested by liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry. Maximal ostarine concentration was 468 ng/mL at T + 15 min, which can also be partially attributed to mouth contamination. Ostarine was detectable during the whole period of test, with concentrations at 1-2 ng/mL after T + 4 h. These results support drug transfer during kissing and subsequent possible contamination of the partner.