M J M Magbanua1, L B Swigart2, H-T Wu3, G L Hirst4, C Yau4, D M Wolf2, A Tin3, R Salari3, S Shchegrova3, H Pawar3, A L Delson5, A DeMichele6, M C Liu7, A J Chien8, D Tripathy9, S Asare10, C-H J Lin3, P Billings3, A Aleshin3, H Sethi3, M Louie3, B Zimmermann3, L J Esserman4, L J van 't Veer11. 1. Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA. Electronic address: mark.magbanua@ucsf.edu. 2. Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA. 3. Natera Inc, San Carlos, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA. 5. Breast Science Advocacy Core, Breast Oncology Program, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA. 6. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA. 7. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. 8. Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA. 9. Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA. 10. Quantum Leap Health Care Collaborative, San Francisco, USA. 11. Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA. Electronic address: laura.vantveer@ucsf.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is strongly associated with favorable outcome. We examined the utility of serial circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing for predicting pCR and risk of metastatic recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) was isolated from 291 plasma samples of 84 high-risk early breast cancer patients treated in the neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 TRIAL with standard NAC alone or combined with MK-2206 (AKT inhibitor) treatment. Blood was collected at pretreatment (T0), 3 weeks after initiation of paclitaxel (T1), between paclitaxel and anthracycline regimens (T2), or prior to surgery (T3). A personalized ctDNA test was designed to detect up to 16 patient-specific mutations (from whole-exome sequencing of pretreatment tumor) in cfDNA by ultra-deep sequencing. The median follow-up time for survival analysis was 4.8 years. RESULTS: At T0, 61 of 84 (73%) patients were ctDNA positive, which decreased over time (T1: 35%; T2: 14%; and T3: 9%). Patients who remained ctDNA positive at T1 were significantly more likely to have residual disease after NAC (83% non-pCR) compared with those who cleared ctDNA (52% non-pCR; odds ratio 4.33, P = 0.012). After NAC, all patients who achieved pCR were ctDNA negative (n = 17, 100%). For those who did not achieve pCR (n = 43), ctDNA-positive patients (14%) had a significantly increased risk of metastatic recurrence [hazard ratio (HR) 10.4; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.3-46.6]; interestingly, patients who did not achieve pCR but were ctDNA negative (86%) had excellent outcome, similar to those who achieved pCR (HR 1.4; 95% CI 0.15-13.5). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of ctDNA clearance was a significant predictor of poor response and metastatic recurrence, while clearance was associated with improved survival even in patients who did not achieve pCR. Personalized monitoring of ctDNA during NAC of high-risk early breast cancer may aid in real-time assessment of treatment response and help fine-tune pCR as a surrogate endpoint of survival.
BACKGROUND: Pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is strongly associated with favorable outcome. We examined the utility of serial circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing for predicting pCR and risk of metastatic recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) was isolated from 291 plasma samples of 84 high-risk early breast cancer patients treated in the neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 TRIAL with standard NAC alone or combined with MK-2206 (AKT inhibitor) treatment. Blood was collected at pretreatment (T0), 3 weeks after initiation of paclitaxel (T1), between paclitaxel and anthracycline regimens (T2), or prior to surgery (T3). A personalized ctDNA test was designed to detect up to 16 patient-specific mutations (from whole-exome sequencing of pretreatment tumor) in cfDNA by ultra-deep sequencing. The median follow-up time for survival analysis was 4.8 years. RESULTS: At T0, 61 of 84 (73%) patients were ctDNA positive, which decreased over time (T1: 35%; T2: 14%; and T3: 9%). Patients who remained ctDNA positive at T1 were significantly more likely to have residual disease after NAC (83% non-pCR) compared with those who cleared ctDNA (52% non-pCR; odds ratio 4.33, P = 0.012). After NAC, all patients who achieved pCR were ctDNA negative (n = 17, 100%). For those who did not achieve pCR (n = 43), ctDNA-positive patients (14%) had a significantly increased risk of metastatic recurrence [hazard ratio (HR) 10.4; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.3-46.6]; interestingly, patients who did not achieve pCR but were ctDNA negative (86%) had excellent outcome, similar to those who achieved pCR (HR 1.4; 95% CI 0.15-13.5). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of ctDNA clearance was a significant predictor of poor response and metastatic recurrence, while clearance was associated with improved survival even in patients who did not achieve pCR. Personalized monitoring of ctDNA during NAC of high-risk early breast cancer may aid in real-time assessment of treatment response and help fine-tune pCR as a surrogate endpoint of survival.
Authors: Jason D Merker; Geoffrey R Oxnard; Carolyn Compton; Maximilian Diehn; Patricia Hurley; Alexander J Lazar; Neal Lindeman; Christina M Lockwood; Alex J Rai; Richard L Schilsky; Apostolia M Tsimberidou; Patricia Vasalos; Brooke L Billman; Thomas K Oliver; Suanna S Bruinooge; Daniel F Hayes; Nicholas C Turner Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-03-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Bradon R McDonald; Tania Contente-Cuomo; Stephen-John Sammut; Ahuva Odenheimer-Bergman; Brenda Ernst; Nieves Perdigones; Suet-Feung Chin; Maria Farooq; Rosa Mejia; Patricia A Cronin; Karen S Anderson; Heidi E Kosiorek; Donald W Northfelt; Ann E McCullough; Bhavika K Patel; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Thomas P Slavin; Carlos Caldas; Barbara A Pockaj; Muhammed Murtaza Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2019-08-07 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Patricia Cortazar; Lijun Zhang; Michael Untch; Keyur Mehta; Joseph P Costantino; Norman Wolmark; Hervé Bonnefoi; David Cameron; Luca Gianni; Pinuccia Valagussa; Sandra M Swain; Tatiana Prowell; Sibylle Loibl; D Lawrence Wickerham; Jan Bogaerts; Jose Baselga; Charles Perou; Gideon Blumenthal; Jens Blohmer; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Jonas Bergh; Vladimir Semiglazov; Robert Justice; Holger Eidtmann; Soonmyung Paik; Martine Piccart; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Peter A Fasching; Leen Slaets; Shenghui Tang; Bernd Gerber; Charles E Geyer; Richard Pazdur; Nina Ditsch; Priya Rastogi; Wolfgang Eiermann; Gunter von Minckwitz Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-02-14 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Emil Christensen; Karin Birkenkamp-Demtröder; Himanshu Sethi; Svetlana Shchegrova; Raheleh Salari; Iver Nordentoft; Hsin-Ta Wu; Michael Knudsen; Philippe Lamy; Sia Viborg Lindskrog; Ann Taber; Mustafa Balcioglu; Søren Vang; Zoe Assaf; Shruti Sharma; Antony S Tin; Ramya Srinivasan; Dina Hafez; Thomas Reinert; Samantha Navarro; Alexander Olson; Rosalyn Ram; Scott Dashner; Matthew Rabinowitz; Paul Billings; Styrmir Sigurjonsson; Claus Lindbjerg Andersen; Ryan Swenerton; Alexey Aleshin; Bernhard Zimmermann; Mads Agerbæk; Cheng-Ho Jimmy Lin; Jørgen Bjerggaard Jensen; Lars Dyrskjøt Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-05-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Bruce J Tromberg; Zheng Zhang; Anaïs Leproux; Thomas D O'Sullivan; Albert E Cerussi; Philip M Carpenter; Rita S Mehta; Darren Roblyer; Wei Yang; Keith D Paulsen; Brian W Pogue; Shudong Jiang; Peter A Kaufman; Arjun G Yodh; So Hyun Chung; Mitchell Schnall; Bradley S Snyder; Nola Hylton; David A Boas; Stefan A Carp; Steven J Isakoff; David Mankoff Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2016-08-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Sarah-Jane Dawson; Dana W Y Tsui; Muhammed Murtaza; Heather Biggs; Oscar M Rueda; Suet-Feung Chin; Mark J Dunning; Davina Gale; Tim Forshew; Betania Mahler-Araujo; Sabrina Rajan; Sean Humphray; Jennifer Becq; David Halsall; Matthew Wallis; David Bentley; Carlos Caldas; Nitzan Rosenfeld Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-03-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: W Fraser Symmans; Florentia Peintinger; Christos Hatzis; Radhika Rajan; Henry Kuerer; Vicente Valero; Lina Assad; Anna Poniecka; Bryan Hennessy; Marjorie Green; Aman U Buzdar; S Eva Singletary; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Lajos Pusztai Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-09-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Stefania Morganti; Antonio Marra; Edoardo Crimini; Paolo D'Amico; Paola Zagami; Giuseppe Curigliano Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2022-02-06 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Marla Lipsyc-Sharf; Elza C de Bruin; Katheryn Santos; Robert McEwen; Daniel Stetson; Ashka Patel; Gregory J Kirkner; Melissa E Hughes; Sara M Tolaney; Ann H Partridge; Ian E Krop; Charlene Knape; Ute Feger; Giovanni Marsico; Karen Howarth; Eric P Winer; Nancy U Lin; Heather A Parsons Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2022-06-04 Impact factor: 50.717
Authors: Haeyoung Kim; Yeon Jeong Kim; Donghyun Park; Woong-Yang Park; Doo Ho Choi; Won Park; Won Kyung Cho; Nalee Kim Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2021-06-21 Impact factor: 4.872