R Condorelli1, L Spring2, J O'Shaughnessy3, L Lacroix1, C Bailleux1, V Scott1, J Dubois2, R J Nagy4, R B Lanman4, A J Iafrate2, F Andre1, A Bardia5. 1. Institute Gustave Roussy, Paris, France. 2. Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA. 3. Texas Oncology-Baylor Charles A. Sammons Cancer Center, Dallas, USA; U.S. Oncology, Dallas, USA. 4. Guardant Health, Inc., Redwood City, USA. 5. Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA. Electronic address: Bardia.aditya@mgh.harvard.edu.
Abstract
Background: While deregulation of the cyclin D1-CDK4/6-retinoblastoma pathway is common in hormone receptor positive (HR+) breast cancer, Rb is usually intact in HR+ breast cancer, and targeted CDK 4/6 inhibitors that act upstream of Rb, are routinely being utilized in clinical practice. However, factors that can lead to clinical resistance to CDK 4/6 inhibitors are not known. Patients and methods: We identified patients who had pre- and post-genotyping in tissue and peripheral blood samples after receiving CDK 4/6 inhibitors. Genotyping was carried out in tumor tissue or blood collected before start of CDK 4/6 inhibitor and after disease progression on CDK 4/6 inhibitor, covering more than 90% of the coding region in RB1. Results: We identified detectable acquired RB1 mutations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) after exposure to CDK4/6 inhibitor (palbociclib, palbociclib, ribociclib) for 5, 8, and 13 months, respectively, in three patients. The RB1 mutations included substitution in donor splicing site of exon 8 of the RB1 gene in patient #1; substitution in donor splicing site of exon 22 of RB1 gene, exon 19 deletion, exon 3 insertion in patient #2; and RB1 exon 16 H483Y mutation in patient #3. None of these RB1 mutations were present in the pre-CDK 4/6 specimen highlighting these molecular alterations, which lead to functional loss of Rb1, likely emerged under selective pressure from the CDK4/6 inhibitor potentially confering therapeutic resistance. Conclusion: This is the first clinical report to describe the emergence of somatic RB1 mutations after exposure to palbociclib or ribociclib, in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Further research is needed to validate these findings, identify how these mutations temporally emerge under selective pressure of CDK 4/6 inhibitor, and develop rational therapeutic strategies.
Background: While deregulation of the cyclin D1-CDK4/6-retinoblastoma pathway is common in hormone receptor positive (HR+) breast cancer, Rb is usually intact in HR+ breast cancer, and targeted CDK 4/6 inhibitors that act upstream of Rb, are routinely being utilized in clinical practice. However, factors that can lead to clinical resistance to CDK 4/6 inhibitors are not known. Patients and methods: We identified patients who had pre- and post-genotyping in tissue and peripheral blood samples after receiving CDK 4/6 inhibitors. Genotyping was carried out in tumor tissue or blood collected before start of CDK 4/6 inhibitor and after disease progression on CDK 4/6 inhibitor, covering more than 90% of the coding region in RB1. Results: We identified detectable acquired RB1 mutations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) after exposure to CDK4/6 inhibitor (palbociclib, palbociclib, ribociclib) for 5, 8, and 13 months, respectively, in three patients. The RB1 mutations included substitution in donor splicing site of exon 8 of the RB1 gene in patient #1; substitution in donor splicing site of exon 22 of RB1 gene, exon 19 deletion, exon 3 insertion in patient #2; and RB1 exon 16 H483Y mutation in patient #3. None of these RB1 mutations were present in the pre-CDK 4/6 specimen highlighting these molecular alterations, which lead to functional loss of Rb1, likely emerged under selective pressure from the CDK4/6 inhibitor potentially confering therapeutic resistance. Conclusion: This is the first clinical report to describe the emergence of somatic RB1 mutations after exposure to palbociclib or ribociclib, in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Further research is needed to validate these findings, identify how these mutations temporally emerge under selective pressure of CDK 4/6 inhibitor, and develop rational therapeutic strategies.
Authors: Lillian M Guenther; Neekesh V Dharia; Linda Ross; Amy Conway; Amanda L Robichaud; Jerrel L Catlett; Caroline S Wechsler; Elizabeth S Frank; Amy Goodale; Alanna J Church; Yuen-Yi Tseng; Rajarshi Guha; Crystal G McKnight; Katherine A Janeway; Jesse S Boehm; Jaume Mora; Mindy I Davis; Gabriela Alexe; Federica Piccioni; Kimberly Stegmaier Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2018-11-05 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Zhiqiang Li; Pedram Razavi; Qing Li; Weiyi Toy; Bo Liu; Christina Ping; Wilson Hsieh; Francisco Sanchez-Vega; David N Brown; Arnaud F Da Cruz Paula; Luc Morris; Pier Selenica; Emily Eichenberger; Ronglai Shen; Nikolaus Schultz; Neal Rosen; Maurizio Scaltriti; Edi Brogi; Jose Baselga; Jorge S Reis-Filho; Sarat Chandarlapaty Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2018-12-10 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Lorenzo Gerratana; Andrew A Davis; Ami N Shah; Chenyu Lin; Carla Corvaja; Massimo Cristofanilli Journal: Curr Treat Options Oncol Date: 2019-06-29
Authors: Johannes Schmoellerl; Inês Amorim Monteiro Barbosa; Thomas Eder; Tania Brandstoetter; Luisa Schmidt; Barbara Maurer; Selina Troester; Ha Thi Thanh Pham; Mohanty Sagarajit; Jessica Ebner; Gabriele Manhart; Ezgi Aslan; Stefan Terlecki-Zaniewicz; Christa Van der Veen; Gregor Hoermann; Nicolas Duployez; Arnaud Petit; Helene Lapillonne; Alexandre Puissant; Raphael Itzykson; Richard Moriggl; Michael Heuser; Roland Meisel; Peter Valent; Veronika Sexl; Johannes Zuber; Florian Grebien Journal: Blood Date: 2020-07-23 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Brent M Kuenzi; Jisoo Park; Samson H Fong; Kyle S Sanchez; John Lee; Jason F Kreisberg; Jianzhu Ma; Trey Ideker Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2020-10-22 Impact factor: 31.743