Search

Abstract Background We previously reported our phase Ib trial, testing the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of T-DM1 + neratinib in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer patients. Patients with ERBB2 amplification in ctDNA had deeper and more durable responses. This study extends these observations with in-depth analysis of molecular markers and mechanisms of resistance in additional patients. Methods Forty-nine HER2-positive patients (determined locally) who progressed on-treatment with trastuzumab + pertuzumab were enrolled in this phase Ib/II study. Mutations and HER2 amplifications were assessed in ctDNA before (C1D1) and on-treatment (C2D1) with the Guardant360 assay. Archived tissue (TP0) and study entry biopsies (TP1) were assayed for whole transcriptome, HER2 copy number, and mutations, with Ampli-Seq, and centrally for HER2 with CLIA assays. Patient responses were assessed with RECIST v1.1, and Molecular Response with the Guardant360 Response algorithm. Results The ORR in phase II was 7/22 (32%), which included all patients who had at least one dose of study therapy. In phase I, the ORR was 12/19 (63%), which included only patients who were considered evaluable, having received their first scan at 6 weeks. Central confirmation of HER2-positivity was found in 83% (30/36) of the TP0 samples. HER2-amplified ctDNA was found at C1D1 in 48% (20/42) of samples. Patients with ctHER2-amp versus non-amplified HER2 ctDNA determined in C1D1 ctDNA had a longer median progression-free survival (PFS): 480 days versus 60 days (P = 0.015). Molecular Response scores were significantly associated with both PFS (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09–0.90, P = 0.033) and best response (P = 0.037). All five of the patients with ctHER2-amp at C1D1 who had undetectable ctDNA after study therapy had an objective response. Patients whose ctHER2-amp decreased on-treatment had better outcomes than patients whose ctHER2-amp remained unchanged. HER2 RNA levels show a correlation to HER2 CLIA IHC status and were significantly higher in patients with clinically documented responses compared to patients with progressive disease (P = 0.03). Conclusions The following biomarkers were associated with better outcomes for patients treated with T-DM1 + neratinib: (1) ctHER2-amp (C1D1) or in TP1; (2) Molecular Response scores; (3) loss of detectable ctDNA; (4) RNA levels of HER2; and (5) on-treatment loss of detectable ctHER2-amp. HER2 transcriptional and IHC/FISH status identify HER2-low cases (IHC 1+ or IHC 2+ and FISH negative) in these heavily anti-HER2 treated patients. Due to the small number of patients and samples in this study, the associations we have shown are for hypothesis generation only and remain to be validated in future studies. Clinical Trials registration NCT02236000

Abstract Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) next-generation sequencing has the potential to capture tumor heterogeneity and genomic evolution under treatment pressure in a non-invasive manner. Here, we report the detection of EGFR L792 mutations, a non-covalent mechanism of osimertinib resistance, using Guardant360 cfDNA testing in a patient with metastatic EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose disease progressed on osimertinib. We subsequently analyzed a large cohort of over 1800 additional patient samples harboring an EGFR T790M mutation and identified a concomitant L792 mutation in a total of 22 (1.2%) cases. In vitro functional assays demonstrated that the EGFR L858R/T790M/L792F/H mutations conferred intermediate-level resistance to osimertinib. Further understanding of potential acquired resistance mechanisms to targeted therapy may help inform treatment strategy in EGFR-mutant NSCLC.

Era+ breast cancer patients often develop resistance to endocrine therapy. Here, the authors show that FGFR1 amplification is a resistance mechanism to CDK4/6 inhibitor and endocrine therapy and that combined treatment with FGFR, CDK4/6, and anti-estrogens is a potential therapeutic strategy in Era+ breast cancer tumors.

MET amplification is rare in treatment-naïve metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) tumors, but can emerge as a mechanism of resistance to anti-EGFR therapies. Preclinical and clinical data suggest that patients with MET amplified tumors benefit from MET-targeted therapy. Cabozantinib is an inhibitor of multiple tyrosine kinases, included c-MET. Panitumumab is an inhibitor of EGFR. This report describes a patient with KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF wild-type metastatic CRC who experienced disease progression on all standard chemotherapy and anti-EGFR antibody therapy. The patient was enrolled in a clinical trial evaluating the combination of cabozantinib plus panitumumab. After only 6 weeks of treatment, the patient experienced a significant anti-tumor response. Although tumor tissue was negative for MET amplification, molecular profiling of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) revealed MET amplification. This case represents the first report showing the activity of cabozantinib in combination with panitumumab in a patient with metastatic CRC, and suggests that MET amplification in cfDNA may be a biomarker of response. A clinical trial targeting MET amplified metastatic CRC is currently underway.

BRAF V600 mutations have been found in 1−2% of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved treatment of dabrafenib plus trametinib and progression free survival (PFS) of 10.9 months. However, 50−80% of BRAF mutations in lung cancer are non-V600, and can be class II, with intermediate to high kinase activity and RAS independence, or class III, with impaired kinase activity, upstream signaling dependence, and consequently, sensitivity to receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) inhibitors. Plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) of 185 newly diagnosed advanced lung adenocarcinoma patients (Spanish Lung Liquid versus Invasive Biopsy Program, SLLIP, NCT03248089) was examined for BRAF and other alterations with a targeted cfDNA next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay (Guardant360®, Guardant Health Inc., CA, USA), and results were correlated with patient outcome. Cell viability with single or combined RAF, MEK, and SHP2 inhibitors was assessed in cell lines with BRAF class I, II, and III mutations. Out of 185 patients, 22 had BRAF alterations (12%) of which seven patients harbored amplifications (32%) and 17 had BRAF mutations (77%). Of the BRAF mutations, four out of 22 (18%) were V600E and 18/22 (82%) were non-V600. In vitro results confirmed sensitivity of class III and resistance of class I and II BRAF mutations, and BRAF wild type cells to SHP2 inhibition. Concomitant MEK or RAF and SHP2 inhibition showed synergistic effects, especially in the class III BRAF-mutant cell line. Our study indicates that the class of the BRAF mutation may have clinical implications and therefore should be defined in the clinical practice and used to guide therapeutic decisions.