Abstract P2-02-19: Somatic genetic profiling of circulating tumor cells (CTC) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients

Introduction: Somatic mutations, including those in TP53, PIK3CA, and estrogen receptor alpha (ESR1), are key to the biology of cancer and response to therapy. Recently, somatic cancer-associated mutations have been identified in circulating cell free plasma tumor DNA (ptDNA). Less is known about the mutation profile of DNA extracted from CTC (CTC-DNA). Since CTC-DNA provides mutational information of single cells, we hypothesize CTC-DNA will complement ptDNA to give greater insight into tumor heterogeneity.

Methods: Patients with ER positive MBC who were enrolled in the Mi CTC-ONCOSEQ, a companion trial to Mi-ONCOSEQ (the Michigan Oncology Sequencing Program), and who had ≥5CTC/7.5 ml whole blood were included. CTC were enriched from white blood cells (WBC) with CellSearch© (CXC kit). CTC and WBC were then purified using DEPArrayTM. DNA from individual CTC and WBC was isolated and subjected to whole genomic amplification (Ampli 1TM WGA). Genetic analysis was performed on individual CTC, pooled CTC and pooled WBC DNA by multiplexed PCR based targeted next generation sequencing (NGS) using the Oncomine Comprehensive Panel (targeting ∼130 onco- and tumor suppressor genes) and the Ion Torrent Proton. All patients had exome sequencing performed on research biopsies of metastases using an Illumina HiSeq 2500 platform.

Results: This pilot study was conducted using high quality DNA from two patients assessed to date. Both patients had lobular carcinoma and as expected harbored somatic, deleterious CDH1 (E-cadherin) mutations (frameshift and non-sense) in both research biopsy and CTC-DNA. These data supported our approach. Patient #1 was TP53 wild type in her research biopsy, but multiple CTC harbored somatic TP53 frame-shift mutations (Table). Patient #2 harbored an ESR1 Y537S mutation in her research biopsy. However, only 4 of 7 CTC also harbored this somatic, heterozygous mutation.

Prioritized mutations in CTCPt#Cell Type (CTC vs WBC), numberGeneMutationVariant fraction (expected 1=homozygous; 0.5=heterozygous)Found in research biopsy?1CTC_A2CDH1p.I584fs1YES CTC_A4  1  CTC_A7  0.54  CTC_pool*  0.74  WBC_pool  0  CTC_A2TP53p.152_156del1NO CTC_A4  1  CTC_A7  0.51  CTC_pool*  0.88  WBC_pool  0 2CTC_A9ESR1p.Y537S0.52YES CTC_D1  0.34  CTC_D2  0.46  CTC_D6  0.65  CTC_pool*  0.35  WBC_pool  0  CTC_A12  0  CTC_D3  0  CTC_D7  0  CTC_A12CDH1p.Q641X1YES CTC_A9  1  CTC_D1  1  CTC_D3  1  CTC_D6  1  CTC_pool*  1  WBC_pool  0 * pool of all CTC

Conclusions: We demonstrate the ability to purify CTC, isolate, and amplify DNA of suitable quality for genetic analysis using a comprehensive targeted sequencing panel. Both known and novel alterations were identified in comparison to research biopsy specimens. This approach allows single cell analysis demonstrating heterogeneity of mutational status in different single cells. Studies of CTC-ESR1 and other genetic abnormalities in patients with known tissue mutations who participated in Mi CTC-ONCOSEQ are now underway.

Citation Format: Paoletti C, Cani AK, Aung K, Darga EP, Cannell EM, Hovelson DH, Yazdani M, Blevins AR, Tokudome N, Larios JM, Thomas DG, Brown ME, Gersch C, Schott AF, Robinson DR, Chinnaiyan AM, Bischoff F, Hayes DF, Rae JM, Tomlins SA. Somatic genetic profiling of circulating tumor cells (CTC) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-02-19.

Abstract P3-05-01: Molecular analysis of cancer tissue, circulating tumor cells (CTC) and cell-free plasma tumor DNA (ptDNA) suggests variable mechanisms of resistance to endocrine therapy (ET) in estrogen receptor (ER) positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC)

Introduction: Fifty percent of ER positive MBC patients do not benefit from ET. Potential mechanisms of resistance to ET in this patient population include absence of ER expression by deletion or suppression, alteration in ER signaling pathway genes, or upregulation of multiple growth factor receptor pathways. We hypothesized that genotyping and phenotyping of CTC combined with genomic analysis of ptDNA will provide important insights into the multiple mechanisms of ET resistance and that a set of blood tests might serve as a "liquid biopsy" abrogating the need for tissue specimens.

Methods: Twenty-four patients providing informed consent were enrolled into the Mi CTC-ONCOSEQ study, a companion trial to Mi-ONCOSEQ (the Michigan Oncology Sequencing Program). Seven of these patients (5 with ER immunohistochemistry (IHC) positive and 2 with ER negative cancers) who had available archived primary and metastatic cancer tissue, a research metastatic biopsy for genomic analysis, and who had ≥5CTC/7.5 ml whole blood (WB) characterized for ER protein (CTC-ER) are the focus of this report. All the patients were ET refractory. None of them was progressing on fulvestrant at the time of study entry. CTC enumeration and phenotyping was performed with CellSearch©. Circulating ptDNA was analyzed by droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR). ER status from archived tissue was obtained from chart review. ER mRNA expression was determined in the research biopsy of metastatic tissue by using quantitative RNA sequencing. Mutational status of ER gene, ESR1, was determined by Next-gen Sequencing using the Illumina HiSeq 2500 platform.

Results: The 2 control patients with triple negative breast cancer had negative CTC-ER. Discordance between CTC-ER and tissue ER by IHC was observed (Table). Two of the 5 ER positive patients retained CTC-ER positivity (39% and 19% of the CTC). One of them (#7) harbored an ESR1 mutation in the research biopsy tissue and in ptDNA, whereas the other (#14) had wild type (WT) ESR1. CTC-ER protein levels in patients #12, 17 and 24 were negative. All had WT ESR1 in the research biopsy tissue. Of note, patient #12 had WT ESR1 in the research biopsy, but an ESR1 mutation was detected in her ptDNA.

Pt#CTC-ER Tissue-ER  ESR1 status in research biopsyESR1 status in ptDNA N[deg]CTC/7.5ml WB% CTC-ER +Primary by IHCMet by IHCMet research biopsy by mRNA  71839%+++Y537SY537S141619%+NA+WTWT12130%+++WTD538G17160%++weakly+WTWT242750%+weakly+weakly+WTWT

Conclusions: These exploratory data suggest heterogeneous mechanisms of resistance to ET in patients with previously determined ER-positive MBC, including ESR1 mutations in ER positive cases (seen in 2 patients) and loss of ER expression (seen in CTC of 3 patients). In contrast, other cancers continue to express WT ESR1, and therefore must have developed alternative mechanisms of resistance. At least 2 of these mechanisms can be detected and monitored with complementary circulating assays: CTC and ptDNA. Further investigations are needed to understand the heterogeneous mechanisms of resistance to ET.

Citation Format: Paoletti C, Aung K, Cannell EM, Darga EP, Chu D, Kidwell KM, Thomas DG, Tokudome N, Brown ME, McNutt LM, Gersch C, Schott AF, Park BH, Robinson DR, Chinnaiyan AM, Rae JM, Hayes DF. Molecular analysis of cancer tissue, circulating tumor cells (CTC) and cell-free plasma tumor DNA (ptDNA) suggests variable mechanisms of resistance to endocrine therapy (ET) in estrogen receptor (ER) positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-05-01.

Predictors of recovery of ovarian function during aromatase inhibitor therapy

BACKGROUND

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) may cause a rise in estrogen levels due to ovarian function recovery in women with clinical chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure (CIOF). We carried out a prospective registry trial to identify predictors of ovarian function recovery during AI therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women with hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer who remained amenorrheic and had hormonal levels consistent with ovarian failure after adjuvant chemotherapy were enrolled in a multi-institutional clinical trial of anastrozole. Subjects underwent frequent assessment using an ultrasensitive estradiol assay. Multivariable analysis was used to evaluate clinical and biochemical predictors of ovarian function recovery within 48 weeks.

RESULTS

Recovery of ovarian function during AI therapy was observed in 13 of 45 (28.9%) assessable subjects after a median 2.1 months (range 0.6-11.9). Median age at chemotherapy initiation was statistically significantly different between those who regained ovarian function (43 years, range 40-51) and those who remained postmenopausal (49 years, range 44-52; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

A significant proportion of women with CIOF recover ovarian function during AI therapy, including a woman over age 50 at initiation of chemotherapy. Tamoxifen remains the standard of care for women with CIOF. If an AI is used, patients should be monitored frequently with high-quality estradiol assays. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT00555477.