Literature DB >> 28130553

ESR1 mutations in breast cancer.

Florian Clatot1,2, Laetitia Augusto2, Frédéric Di Fiore1,2,3.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Keywords:  ESR1 mutations; breast cancer; circulating DNA

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28130553      PMCID: PMC5310651          DOI: 10.18632/aging.101165

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aging (Albany NY)        ISSN: 1945-4589            Impact factor:   5.682


× No keyword cloud information.
In the area of personalized medicine, the main challenge of treating metastatic breast cancer (BC) remains to improve overall survival without deteriorating quality of life. Around 70% of breast tumors express estrogen receptors (ER+), which makes them usually sensitive to a hormonal blockage. Hormonal therapy is commonly the recommended first-line treatment for ER+ metastatic BC since it can provide a tumor growth arrest with few side-effects [1]. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) is the actual backbone of hormonal treatment in the metastatic setting for many patients. The rationale of AIs is the inhibition of estrogene synthesis in peripheral tissues leading to complete lack of activation of the ER. If numerous mechanisms of AI resistance may occur, the key role of the estrogen receptor gene (ESR1) mutations was recently investigated. Several hot-spot mutations have been reported, usually modifying the ligand biding domain of the ER, leading to a ligand-independent receptor activity. Collectively, the 5 main mutations (D538G, E380Q and D537S/N/C) represent more than 80% of the ESR1 mutations. These mutations are an acquired molecular event since they are almost absent in primary BC tumour (<2%) but occur in metastatic tissues in around 25-30% of cases secondary to AI exposure [2]. At a glance, the emergence of ESR1 mutations is a marker of AI resistance. Instead repeated biopsies of metastases, it has been demonstrated that the detection of ESR1 mutations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) by digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) is sensitive and highly correlates to the ESR1 mutational status in tumor tissue [3]. Thus, plasma samples from ER+ metastatic BC patients can be regarded as liquid biopsies and might help choosing the right treatment to the right patient at the right time in the near future. Indeed, a growing amount of evidence has supported the potential clinical utility of ESR1 mutational status assessment. We have recently shown that ESR1 mutation can raise during first-line AI treatment in the metastatic setting, with 75% of the ESR1 mutated patients having a detectable circulating mutation at least 3 months before clinical progression [4]. Several studies have reported that the detection of circulating ESR1 mutations was an independent factor of poor prognosis both in progression-free survival [5,6] and in overall survival [4,6]. In terms of treatment, if the use of CDK or mTOR inhibitors in association with hormonal therapy provides a significant improvement for ER+ metastatic BC, their benefit in case of ESR1 mutation is not yet established. Prospective studies are needed to determine the best therapeutic options when circulating ESR1 mutations occurre during AI exposure. The next act of the “ESR1 saga” will be played at a molecular level. Indeed, it has been reported that the resistance to hormonal treatment is different when considering each individual ESR1 mutation [7]. Toy et al. performed a functional analysis using MCF7 cells and confirmed that the ER auto-activation associated with ESR1 mutations was maximal in Y537S mutants. Furthermore, the estrogen-independent activity of mutant receptors was higher in frequent mutants – in particular Y537S – than in less frequent mutants such as E380Q. Interestingly, they also showed that fulvestrant, an ER inhibitor currently used in clinical practice, may reverse resistance induced by ESR1 mutations [5] with a differential effect according to mutations; the Y537S mutant requiring the highest dose of fulvestrant to achieve growth inhibition of MCF7 cells compared to other mutants. These results were confirmed in MCF7 derived xenografts exposed to fulvestrant, for which fulvestrant provided a growth arrest in all mutants tested (wild type, E380Q, S463P, Y537C/N or D538G) but not for the Y537S one. In contrast, the AZD9496 compound - an ER inhibitor with available phase I data - inhibited successfully D538G and Y537S mutated MCF7-derived xenografts. Interestingly, these data are in line with a retrospective analysis of a large clinical trial, in which patients harboring the D538G mutation benefited from the addition of everolimus (mTOR inhibitor) to exemestane (aromatase inhibitor) for metastatic breast cancer patients progressing on AI, while it was not the case for patients with Y537S mutations [6]. In conclusion, ESR1 mutations have recently emerged as a key mechanism of AI resistance in ER+ metastatic BC. ESR1 mutations are a new prognostic factor of poor survival which appearance can be monitored in blood sample, and for which specific drugs are on development. The recent publication by Toy et al. also underlines the need for a better understanding of the clinical outcome depending on the peculiar ESR1 mutation observed.
  6 in total

1.  3rd ESO-ESMO international consensus guidelines for Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC 3).

Authors:  F Cardoso; A Costa; E Senkus; M Aapro; F André; C H Barrios; J Bergh; G Bhattacharyya; L Biganzoli; M J Cardoso; L Carey; D Corneliussen-James; G Curigliano; V Dieras; N El Saghir; A Eniu; L Fallowfield; D Fenech; P Francis; K Gelmon; A Gennari; N Harbeck; C Hudis; B Kaufman; I Krop; M Mayer; H Meijer; S Mertz; S Ohno; O Pagani; E Papadopoulos; F Peccatori; F Penault-Llorca; M J Piccart; J Y Pierga; H Rugo; L Shockney; G Sledge; S Swain; C Thomssen; A Tutt; D Vorobiof; B Xu; L Norton; E Winer
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2016-12-05       Impact factor: 4.380

Review 2.  ESR1 mutations—a mechanism for acquired endocrine resistance in breast cancer.

Authors:  Rinath Jeselsohn; Gilles Buchwalter; Carmine De Angelis; Myles Brown; Rachel Schiff
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-06-30       Impact factor: 66.675

3.  Analysis of ESR1 mutation in circulating tumor DNA demonstrates evolution during therapy for metastatic breast cancer.

Authors:  Gaia Schiavon; Sarah Hrebien; Isaac Garcia-Murillas; Rosalind J Cutts; Alex Pearson; Noelia Tarazona; Kerry Fenwick; Iwanka Kozarewa; Elena Lopez-Knowles; Ricardo Ribas; Ashutosh Nerurkar; Peter Osin; Sarat Chandarlapaty; Lesley-Ann Martin; Mitch Dowsett; Ian E Smith; Nicholas C Turner
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 17.956

4.  Prevalence of ESR1 Mutations in Cell-Free DNA and Outcomes in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of the BOLERO-2 Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Sarat Chandarlapaty; David Chen; Wei He; Patricia Sung; Aliaksandra Samoila; Daoqi You; Trusha Bhatt; Parul Patel; Maurizio Voi; Michael Gnant; Gabriel Hortobagyi; José Baselga; Mary Ellen Moynahan
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2016-10-01       Impact factor: 31.777

5.  Kinetics, prognostic and predictive values of ESR1 circulating mutations in metastatic breast cancer patients progressing on aromatase inhibitor.

Authors:  Florian Clatot; Anne Perdrix; Laetitia Augusto; Ludivine Beaussire; Julien Delacour; Céline Calbrix; David Sefrioui; Pierre-Julien Viailly; Michael Bubenheim; Cristian Moldovan; Cristina Alexandru; Isabelle Tennevet; Olivier Rigal; Cécile Guillemet; Marianne Leheurteur; Sophie Gouérant; Camille Petrau; Jean-Christophe Théry; Jean-Michel Picquenot; Corinne Veyret; Thierry Frébourg; Fabrice Jardin; Nasrin Sarafan-Vasseur; Frédéric Di Fiore
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2016-11-15

6.  Plasma ESR1 Mutations and the Treatment of Estrogen Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Charlotte Fribbens; Ben O'Leary; Lucy Kilburn; Sarah Hrebien; Isaac Garcia-Murillas; Matthew Beaney; Massimo Cristofanilli; Fabrice Andre; Sherene Loi; Sibylle Loibl; John Jiang; Cynthia Huang Bartlett; Maria Koehler; Mitch Dowsett; Judith M Bliss; Stephen R D Johnston; Nicholas C Turner
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-06-06       Impact factor: 44.544

  6 in total
  6 in total

1.  Plasma-Based Longitudinal Evaluation of ESR1 Epigenetic Status in Hormone Receptor-Positive HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Lorenzo Gerratana; Debora Basile; Alessandra Franzoni; Lorenzo Allegri; Davide Viotto; Carla Corvaja; Lucia Bortot; Elisa Bertoli; Silvia Buriolla; Giada Targato; Lucia Da Ros; Stefania Russo; Marta Bonotto; Barbara Belletti; Gustavo Baldassarre; Giuseppe Damante; Fabio Puglisi
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2020-09-18       Impact factor: 6.244

2.  Bioinformatics Analysis Identifies the Estrogen Receptor 1 (ESR1) Gene and hsa-miR-26a-5p as Potential Prognostic Biomarkers in Patients with Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.

Authors:  Xianzheng Qin; Yuning Song
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2020-05-21

Review 3.  Metastatic breast cancer: Endocrine therapy landscape reshaped.

Authors:  Mohamad Adham Salkeni; Samantha June Hall
Journal:  Avicenna J Med       Date:  2017 Oct-Dec

4.  Identification of Breast Cancer Subtype Specific MicroRNAs Using Survival Analysis to Find Their Role in Transcriptomic Regulation.

Authors:  Michał Denkiewicz; Indrajit Saha; Somnath Rakshit; Jnanendra Prasad Sarkar; Dariusz Plewczynski
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2019-10-31       Impact factor: 4.599

5.  Tamoxifen induces hypercoagulation and alterations in ERα and ERβ dependent on breast cancer sub-phenotype ex vivo.

Authors:  K Pather; T N Augustine
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-11-06       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Systems Medicine Design for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer and Non-Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Based on Systems Identification and Carcinogenic Mechanisms.

Authors:  Shan-Ju Yeh; Bo-Jie Hsu; Bor-Sen Chen
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 5.923

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.