| Literature DB >> 31546901 |
Luisa Carbognin1,2, Federica Miglietta3,4, Ida Paris5, Maria Vittoria Dieci6,7.
Abstract
The characterization of tumor biology and consequently the identification of prognostic and predictive biomarkers represent key issues for the translational research in breast cancer (BC). Phosphatase and tensin homolog deleted on chromosome ten (PTEN), the negative regulator of the proto-oncogenic phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B (Akt) pathway, constitutes one of the most intriguing tumor suppressor genes involved in a series of biological processes, such as cell growth and survival, cellular migration and genomic stability. Loss of PTEN activity, due to protein, genetic or epigenetic alterations, was reported in up to almost half of BC cases. Recently, besides the role of PTEN in the pathogenesis of BC, investigated for over 20 years after the PTEN discovery, several retrospective and prospective translational studies, in the early and advanced setting, reported controversial results regarding the association between PTEN functional status and both clinical outcome and response to various BC treatments. This review explores the pre-clinical and clinical role of PTEN in BC with regard to the potential association of PTEN with prognosis and treatment response or resistance, underlying the complexity of the interpretation of available results and suggesting potential future perspectives.Entities:
Keywords: PTEN; breast cancer; predictive role; prognosis; survival; treatment response
Year: 2019 PMID: 31546901 PMCID: PMC6769721 DOI: 10.3390/cancers11091401
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Phase II and phase III clinical trials with translational analyses exploring the predictive role of chromosome ten (PTEN) in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer.
| Drug Family | Agent | Trial | Phase | Population | Setting | Arms | N pts (Translational Analysis) | PTEN Analysis | Main Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Everolimus | TAMRAD [ | II | HR+/HER2- MBC | AI-resistant | Tamoxifene + Everolimus | 30 | IHC clone 138G6 Cell Signaling Technology (% and intensity: | No predictive role (TTP) |
| BOLERO-2 [ | III | HR+/HER2- | AI-resistant | Exemestane + Everolimus | 209 | NGS (at least 1 mutation) | No predictive role (PFS) | ||
| IHC (low-PTEN: H-score < 10) | No predictive role (PFS) | ||||||||
|
| Ipatasertib | LOTUS [ | II | TN | First Line | Paclitaxel + Ipatasertib | 54 | IHC (low PTEN score 0 in at least 50% of tumor cells) | No predictive role (PFS) |
| NGS (genetic-inactivating alterations) | mPFS of 9.0 m with ipatasertib versus 4.9 m with placebo | ||||||||
| FARLAINE [ | II | TN | Neoadjuvant | CT + Ipatasertib | Overall | IHC clone Ventana SP218 (low PTEN: score 0%–50% of tumor cells) | pCR rate 16% with ipatasertib versus 13% with placebo in PTEN-low population | ||
| NGS (PTEN genomic alterations) | pCR rate 18% with ipatasertib versus 12% with placebo in PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered subgroup | ||||||||
| Capivasertib | PAKT [ | II | TN | First Line | Paclitaxel + Capivasertib | Overall 140 | NGS (genetic alteration) | mPFS of 9.3 m with capivasertib versus 3.7 m with placebo in PIK3CA, AKT1 or PTEN-altered subgroup (HR 0.30, | |
| FAKTION [ | II | HR+/HER2- | AI-resistant | Fulvestrant + Capivasertib | 69 | IHC | No predictive role (PFS) | ||
|
| Talazoparib | NCT02401347 [ | II | HER2- | Pretreated | Talazoparib | 20 (13 BRCA1/2 wt MBC and 7 non- breast) | NGS (homologous recombination pathway: PTEN gene mutation) | 3 pts had a RECIST response (ORR = 25%, 2 gPALB2, 1 gCHEK2/gFANCA/sPTEN) and 3 additional pts (gPALB2, sATR, sPTEN) had SD ≥ 6 m. (CBR = 50%) |
|
| Anastrozole/Fulvestrant | CARMINA 02 [ | II | HER2- | Neoadjuvant | Anastrozole Fulvestrant | Overall | gene expression (PTEN-related encoding gene | PTEN-related encoding gene TPTE significantly overexpressed in responders but not in non-responders |
Abbreviations: HR+, hormone-receptor positive; MBC, metastatic breast cancer; AI, aromatase inhibitor; IHC, immunohistochemistry; TTP, time-to-progression; NGS, next-generation sequencing; (m)PFS, (median)progression-free survival; TN, triple-negative; AKT, protein kinase B; EBC, early breast cancer; CT, chemotherapy; pCR, pathologic complete response; HR, hazard ratio; ORR, overall response rate; SD, stable disease; m., months; PARP, poly ADP-ribose polymeraseCHECK2, checkpoint kinase 2; FANCA, Fanconi Anemia group A protein; CBR, clinical benefit rate.
Phase II and phase III clinical trials with translational analyses exploring the predictive role of PTEN in HER2-positive breast cancer.
| Treatment Strategy | Agent | Trial | Phase | Population | Setting | Arms | N pts (Translational Analysis) | PTEN Analysis | Main Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Trastuzumab | NCT00133796 [ | II | EBC | Neoadjuvant | CT + Trastuzumab | 35 | IHC (protein level: 0 versus 1+ versus 2+ versus 3+) | pCR rates in low-PTEN versus high-PTEN: 15.4% versus 44.4% |
| GeparQuattro [ | III | EBC | Neoadjuvant | CT (anthra-taxane) + Trastuzumab | Overall 108 | automated quantitative immunofluorescence (PTEN-low <60.1) | pCR rates in high-PTEN versus low-low PTEN: 57.1% versus 27.6% | ||
| N9831 [ | III | EBC | Adjuvant | CT alone | 601 | IHC (PTEN+: >0% invasive cells with ≥1+ cytoplasmatic staining; examination of alternate cut-points) | No predictive role with different cut-points (DFS) | ||
| BCIRG-006 [ | III | EBC | Adjuvant | CT (anthra) + Trastuzumab | 402 | IHC clone 9559 Cell Signaling Technology (protein level: 0 versus 1+ versus 2+ versus 3+) | No predictive role (DFS, OS) | ||
| Lapatinib | EGF103009 [ | II | MBC | Refractory or recurrent after anthracycline-containing regimen in the adjuvant or metastatic setting | Lapatinib | 30 | IHCclone by Cascade Bioscience (protein level: 0 versus 1+ versus 2+ versus 3+) | No predictive role (ORR) | |
| EGF104535 [ | III | MBC | First-line | CT + Lapatinib | 180 | IHC clone 138G6 Cell Signaling Technology (protein level: 0 versus 1+ versus 2+ versus 3+; two alternative cutoffs for PTEN-low: 0/1+ or 0) | No predictive role (PFS, OS) | ||
|
| Trastuzumab + Pertuzumab | Cleopatra [ | III | MBC | First-line | CT + Trastuzumab + Pertuzumab | Overall | IHC clone AF847; R and D Systems (modified H-scores: 0–400, for membrane, cytoplasm and nucleus; low versus high: median value adopted as cutoff) | No predictive role (PFS, OS) |
| TRYPHAENA [ | II | EBC | Neoadjuvant | 3 arms of Pertuzumab + Trastuzumab + CT (different CT regimens) | Overall 225 | IHC clone by Cell Signalling (modified H-score: 0–400, nuclear compartment; low versus high: median value adopted as cutoff) | No predictive role (pCR) | ||
| NeoSphere [ | II | EBC | Neoadjuvant | CT + Trastuzumab | 95 | IHC (modified H-score: 0–400, cytoplasmatic compartment; low versus high: median value adopted as cutoff) | No predictive role (pCR) | ||
| Aphinity [ | III | EBC | Adjuvant | CT + Trastuzumab + Pertuzumab | Overall | DNA analysis for PI3K pathway alterations | Trend towards decreased benefit from pertuzumab in patients with PTEN/AKT/PIK3CA alterations (NS) | ||
| Trastuzumab + Lapatinib | NCT00206427 [ | II | EBC | Neoadjuvant | CT + Trastuzumab + Lapatinib | 49 | IHC clone AF847, R and D Systems (protein level: 0 versus 1+ versus 2+ versus 3+) | pCR rates in low PTEN versus normal-PTEN: 92.3% versus 41.2% | |
| NCT00524303 [ | II | EBC | Neoadjuvant | CT + Trastuzumab | Overall | NA | No predictive role (pCR) | ||
| Neo-ALTTO [ | III | EBC | Neoadjuvant | Trastuzumab | Overall 429 | IHC clone 6H2.1 DAKO and clone 138G6 Cell Signaling Technology (H score system: PTEN-low H-score < 50 in invasive tumor cell compartment; analysis of alternative cut-point H-score ≤ 10; 2 observers) | No predictive role (pCR) | ||
| CHER-LOB [ | II | EBC | Neoadjuvant | CT+ Trastuzumab | Overall | IHC clone 28H6 Novocastra (PTEN loss: staining < 10% cancer cells) | No predictive role (pCR) | ||
| ICORG 10-05 [ | II | EBC | Neoadjuvant | CT + Trastuzumab | 21 | IHC clone 6H2.1 Dako (protein level: 0 versus 1+ versus 2+ versus 3+) | No predictive role (pCR) | ||
| TBCRC006 [ | II | EBC | Neoadjuvant | Trastuzumab + Lapatinib | 59 | IHC clone D4.3 Cell Signaling (H-score. PTEN low versus high: H-score <100 versus ≥100) | pCR rates in high-PTEN versus low-PTEN: 32% versus 9% | ||
|
| TDM1 | Emilia [ | III | MBC | Previous treatment with Trastuzumab and a taxane | TDM1 | 134 | IHC clone 138G6 Cell Signaling Technology (cytoplasmic PTEN expression: none versus decreased versus slightly decreased versus equivalent versus increased) | Absent or decreased tumor PTEN expression associated PFS benefit with T-DM1 relative to that with CT + Lapatinib |
| TH3RESA [ | III | MBC | ≥2 previous anti-HER2 regimens (including Trastuzumab and Lapatinib in the advanced setting) | TDM1 | 247 | IHC clone 138G6 Cell Signaling Technology (H-score: 0–400; low versus high: median adopted as cutoff = 200) | No predictive role (PFS) | ||
| Marianne [ | III | MBC | First-line | CT + Trastuzumab | 182 | IHC clone 138G6 Cell Signaling Technology (protein level: 0 versus 1+ versus 2+ versus 3+; H-score: median value adopted as cutoff, cytoplasmatic compartment) | No predictive role (PFS) |
Abbreviations: EBC, early breast cancer; CT, chemotherapy; IHC, immunohistochemistry; pCR, pathologic complete response; DFS, disease-free survival; anthra, anthracycline-containing regimen; non-anthra, non-anthracycline containing regimen; OS; overall survival; cape, Capecitabine; MBC, metastatic breast cancer; PFS, progression-free survival, ORR, overall response rate; NA, not applicable; NS, not-significant; TDM1, trastuzumab-emtansine; TPC, treatment of physician’s choice.