Arielle L Heeke1, Andrew Elliott2, Rebecca Feldman2, Hazel F O'Connor3, Paula R Pohlmann4, Filipa Lynce5, Sandra M Swain6, Maria R Nunes7, Daniel Magee2, Matthew J Oberley2, Jeffrey Swenson2, Gregory Vidal8,9, Claudine Isaacs6, Lee Schwartzberg8,9, W Michael Korn2,10, Antoinette R Tan3. 1. Department of Solid Tumor Oncology and Investigational Therapeutics, Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA. arielle.heeke@atriumhealth.org. 2. Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ, USA. 3. Department of Solid Tumor Oncology and Investigational Therapeutics, Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA. 4. University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. 5. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 6. Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA. 7. Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. 8. West Cancer Center and Research Institute, Memphis, TN, USA. 9. University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA. 10. University of California in San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) mutations and fusions typically arise in patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer after aromatase inhibitor therapy, whereby ESR1 is constitutively activated in a ligand-independent manner. These variants can impact treatment response. Herein, we characterize ESR1 variants among molecularly profiled advanced breast cancers. METHODS: DNA next-generation sequencing (592-gene panel) data from 9860 breast cancer samples were retrospectively reviewed. Gene fusions were detected using the ArcherDx fusion assay or whole transcriptome sequencing (n = 344 and n = 4305, respectively). Statistical analyses included Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: An ESR1 ligand-binding domain (LBD) mutation was detected in 8.6% of tumors evaluated and a pathogenic ESR1 fusion was detected in 1.6%. Most ESR1 LBD mutations/fusions were from estrogen receptor (ER)-positive samples (20.1% and 4.9%, respectively). The most common ESR1 LBD mutations included D538G (3.3%), Y537S (2.3%), and E380Q (1.1%) mutations. Among biopsy sites, ESR1 LBD mutations were most observed in liver metastases. Pathogenic ESR1 fusions were identified in 76 samples (1.6%) with 40 unique fusion partners. Evaluating co-alterations, ESR1 variant (mutation/fusion) samples more frequently expressed androgen receptor (78.0% vs 58.6, P < 0.0001) and less frequently immune checkpoint proteins than ESR1 wild-type (PD-1 20.0% vs 53.4, P < 0.05; immune cell PD-L1 10.0% vs 30.2, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: We have described one of the largest series of ESR1 fusions reported. ESR1 LBD mutations were commonly identified in ER-positive disease. Limited data exists regarding the clinical impact of ESR1 fusions, which could be an area for future therapeutic exploration.
PURPOSE: Estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) mutations and fusions typically arise in patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer after aromatase inhibitor therapy, whereby ESR1 is constitutively activated in a ligand-independent manner. These variants can impact treatment response. Herein, we characterize ESR1 variants among molecularly profiled advanced breast cancers. METHODS: DNA next-generation sequencing (592-gene panel) data from 9860 breast cancer samples were retrospectively reviewed. Gene fusions were detected using the ArcherDx fusion assay or whole transcriptome sequencing (n = 344 and n = 4305, respectively). Statistical analyses included Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: An ESR1 ligand-binding domain (LBD) mutation was detected in 8.6% of tumors evaluated and a pathogenic ESR1 fusion was detected in 1.6%. Most ESR1 LBD mutations/fusions were from estrogen receptor (ER)-positive samples (20.1% and 4.9%, respectively). The most common ESR1 LBD mutations included D538G (3.3%), Y537S (2.3%), and E380Q (1.1%) mutations. Among biopsy sites, ESR1 LBD mutations were most observed in liver metastases. Pathogenic ESR1 fusions were identified in 76 samples (1.6%) with 40 unique fusion partners. Evaluating co-alterations, ESR1 variant (mutation/fusion) samples more frequently expressed androgen receptor (78.0% vs 58.6, P < 0.0001) and less frequently immune checkpoint proteins than ESR1 wild-type (PD-1 20.0% vs 53.4, P < 0.05; immune cell PD-L1 10.0% vs 30.2, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: We have described one of the largest series of ESR1 fusions reported. ESR1 LBD mutations were commonly identified in ER-positive disease. Limited data exists regarding the clinical impact of ESR1 fusions, which could be an area for future therapeutic exploration.
Authors: A S Coates; E P Winer; A Goldhirsch; R D Gelber; M Gnant; M Piccart-Gebhart; B Thürlimann; H-J Senn Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2015-05-04 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Ahmed Basudan; Nolan Priedigkeit; Ryan J Hartmaier; Ethan S Sokol; Amir Bahreini; Rebecca J Watters; Michelle M Boisen; Rohit Bhargava; Kurt R Weiss; Maria M Karsten; Carsten Denkert; Jens-Uwe Blohmer; Jose P Leone; Ronald L Hamilton; Adam M Brufsky; Esther Elishaev; Peter C Lucas; Adrian V Lee; Steffi Oesterreich Journal: Mol Cancer Res Date: 2018-10-24 Impact factor: 5.852
Authors: Carol E DeSantis; Jiemin Ma; Mia M Gaudet; Lisa A Newman; Kimberly D Miller; Ann Goding Sauer; Ahmedin Jemal; Rebecca L Siegel Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2019-10-02 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Hongchao Pan; Richard Gray; Jeremy Braybrooke; Christina Davies; Carolyn Taylor; Paul McGale; Richard Peto; Kathleen I Pritchard; Jonas Bergh; Mitch Dowsett; Daniel F Hayes Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Dan R Robinson; Yi-Mi Wu; Pankaj Vats; Fengyun Su; Robert J Lonigro; Xuhong Cao; Shanker Kalyana-Sundaram; Rui Wang; Yu Ning; Lynda Hodges; Amy Gursky; Javed Siddiqui; Scott A Tomlins; Sameek Roychowdhury; Kenneth J Pienta; Scott Y Kim; J Scott Roberts; James M Rae; Catherine H Van Poznak; Daniel F Hayes; Rashmi Chugh; Lakshmi P Kunju; Moshe Talpaz; Anne F Schott; Arul M Chinnaiyan Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2013-11-03 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Weiyi Toy; Yang Shen; Helen Won; Bradley Green; Rita A Sakr; Marie Will; Zhiqiang Li; Kinisha Gala; Sean Fanning; Tari A King; Clifford Hudis; David Chen; Tetiana Taran; Gabriel Hortobagyi; Geoffrey Greene; Michael Berger; José Baselga; Sarat Chandarlapaty Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2013-11-03 Impact factor: 38.330