Search

Introduction: Prostate cancer therapy involves the use of androgen deprivation therapy, chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy. Chemotherapy involves the use of anti-tubulins (docetaxel, cabazitaxel), platinum salts, and topoisomerase inhibitors (TOPO1, TOPO2A). There is no biomarker of chemotherapy that is routinely used. We examined 87 prostate cancer samples using targeted proteomics for biomarkers of response or resistance to chemotherapy agents. Biomarkers of resistance include ERCC1 (Platinum), TUBB3 (taxanes), ALDH1A1 (cyclophosphamide), while response biomarkers include TOPO1 (irinotecan, topotecan), TOPO2A (doxorubicin, epirubicin), and hENT1 (Gemcitabine). We also measured markers for several antibody-drug conjugates targets (Her2, Her3, Trop2) in our clinical proteomics (CLIA) platform and several ADC/CAR-T proteins (PSMA, STEAP1, Nectin4, Claudin 18.2. in our research platform Methods: Tumor areas from Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor tissues from clinical samples of prostate cancer received at our CLIA certified laboratory were microdissected and a quantitative proteomic analysis of 72 biomarkers were conducted using selected reaction monitoring mass spectrometry (SRM-MS). Discussion:[WL1] Androgen receptor was detected in majority of the samples (83%) with a 19x range of distribution (329 amol/ug - 24063 amol/µg). Majority of prostate cancer samples expressed a range of resistance markers for anti-tubulin inhibitors (TUBB3: 69% detection with a 14x range) indicating that the high expressors is likely to be resistant to docetaxel/cabazitaxel based regimens. ERCC1, a marker for resistance to platinum-based agents, was not detected in 26% of cases, potentially enabling a cisplatin/carboplatin-based regimen in 1/4th of prostate cancer patients. Cyclophosphamide could be effective in 10% of cases where ALDH1A1 was not detected. TOPO1, a marker for irinotecan-based therapy was observed in 94% of cases with a range of ~6x (488 - 2760 amol/µg). Other chemotherapy agents that are not routinely used in prostate cancer was observed in select groups. These include doxorubicin biomarker TOPO2A in 34% of cases with 10x range, gemcitabine biomarker hENT1 in 36% of cases (4x range), temozolomide biomarker MGMT (ND in 12% of cases). ADC biomarker analysis revealed HER2 which was observed in 59% of the cases with range of expression from 301 - 1255 amol/µg including a significant population of low HER2 (84%, Citation Format: Sheeno P. Thyparambil, Wei-Li Liao, Robert Heaton, Amanda Strasbaugh, Marya Melkie, Negin Ghafourian, Xuefeng B. Ling. Quantitative proteomics of antibody-drug conjugates and chemotherapy targets in prostate cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 2160.

671 Background: Pancreatic cancer (PaC) is a highly fatal disease with a 5-year survival rate of 5-10%. Effective screening is not available, and most patients (50-55%) present with metastatic (50%-55%) disease at diagnosis. For patients with advanced PaC, the standard chemotherapy combinations include FOLFIRINOX and/or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel which has results in a overall survival of 7-11 months. The lack of effective therapies underscores the importance of exploring other agents. We propose that quantitating therapy-associated protein biomarkers including markers of antibody-drug conjugates (ADC) can improve treatment personalization for PaC. Methods: FFPE tumor tissues from 185 clinical PaC patients were microdissected and solubilized for mass spectrometry-based targeted proteomic analysis. We quantified biomarkers for ADCs simultaneously from 2-3 section of FFPE. These biomarkers include antibody targets such as EGFR, HER2, HER3, FRalpha, and Trop2 and payload biomarkers of sensitivity (TOPO1) and resistance (TUBB3). The multiplexed assay also quantified additional 65 clinically relevant protein biomarkers for chemotherapy, immunotherapy and targeted therapy. Results: Expression of EGFR was observed in majority of samples (88%) while only overexpressed ( > 1000 amol/µg) in 3% of samples. HER2 was expressed in half of patients (52%) and overexpressed ( > 750 amol/µg) in 5% of cases while the rest of HER2 protein expression ranged from 300 -750 amol/µg which corresponds to low Her2 expression. Trop2 was expressed in majority of patients (91%) with a 25x distribution between lowest and highest expressor. Other ADC biomarkers include HER3(55%, 5x), Axl (24%, 12x), Mesothelin (65%, 58x), Folate receptor alpha (10%, 17x). Expression of TUBB3 (77%, 8x) and TOPO1 (92%, 8x) in antibody target-positive subset may suggest resistance or response for several known payloads, such as taxanes and irinotecan/deruxtecan/govitecan, respectively. Conclusions: There is currently no approved ADC for pancreatic cancer, but several ADC clinical trials are underway. Quantitative proteomics identified antibody targets as well as markers of resistance or response to payloads for a variety of approved and investigational ADC therapies, which could aid in patient stratification in ADC clinical trials.

Introduction: Trop2 is overexpressed in many cancers and currently Trop2 ADC is approved in TNBC. In ADC drug design, it is imperative to assess not only the levels of the receptor but also the payload biomarkers. We have developed a multiplex mass spectrometry method to quantitate 72 actionable proteins from FFPE samples that requires minimal tissue (2-3 sections). This panel includes chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy agents. The test is run in our CAP, CLIA, and NYSDOH approved laboratory. For this study, we examined a subset of samples run in the clinical lab for the levels of Trop2 (target biomarker) and payload biomarkers (Topo1, TUBB3). Topo1 is a chemosensitive marker for irinotecan, while TUBB3 is a chemoresistance marker for tubulin inhibitors. Methods: FFPE tissue sections from 1140 clinical samples from a variety of cancers were examined. These include breast (n=318), colorectal (n=228), ovarian (n=199), GBM (n=69), NSCLC (n=169), HNSCC (n=91), and Gastric cancer (n=66). Two sections (10 µ) of FFPE tissue were cut on DIRECTOR slides and only the tumor areas were laser microdissected for downstream analysis which resulted in tryptic peptides. 1µg of peptides (~4000 cells) along with heavy peptides was injected into a triple quad mass spec and 72 biomarkers were quantitated concurrently. Results: Trop2 showed a wide range of expression in various cancers. Almost all (95%)breast cancer samples expressed Trop2 which exhibited a wide range (93x; 157 - 14650 amol/µg). Topo1 and TUBB3 were expressed in 93% and 60% of samples respectively. 1/4th of NSCLC does not express Trop2 and there is a 106x difference in expression of Trop2 in NSCLC. Topo1 was expressed in almost all samples while TUBB3 was expressed in 80% of NSCLC. Majority of ovarian cancer samples (85%), HNSCC (89%), Gastric cancer (88%) samples expressed Trop2 with a 113x, 134x, 47x difference in expression. Chemosensitive biomarker Topo1 was expressed in almost all ovarian (96%), HNSCC (91%) and Gastric (99%) cancer samples. Chemoresistant marker TUBB3 was expressed in 66% of ovarian cancer, 44% of HNSCC and 45% of gastric cancer samples. In contrast to above cancers, only 10% of Glioblastoma samples express Trop2 and only 3/4th of GBMs express Topo1. Discussion: In a randomly selected group of cancers, we have found Trop2 is expressed in majority of Breast, Ovarian, Lung, HNSCC and gastric cancers and minimal expression in GBM. Given the range of expression of anti-tubulin resistance marker in many solid tumors, a payload biomarker guided clinical trial is highly recommended in ADCs that employ anti-tubulin inhibitors. In contrast, wide expression of chemosensitive biomarker for Topo1 payload makes it a promising candidate for many solid tumors. Further studies are warranted to determine the level of target and payload biomarkers that will be required for a clinical response. Citation Format: Sheeno P. Thyparambil, Wei-Li Liao, Robert Heaton, Guolin Zhang, Amanda Strasbaugh, Marya Melkie, Xuefeng B. Ling. Clinical survey of Trop2 antibody drug conjugate target and payload biomarkers in multiple cancer indications using multiplex mass spectrometry [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 4099.

343 Background: Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) continues to have extremely poor prognosis despite advances in surgical and oncological regimens. Targeted and immune therapy hold promise to improve outcomes in solid tumors including EAC. At present HER-2 and anti-PD-L1 therapies are approved by the FDA for EAC. Additionally, off-label use of EGFR directed therapy has been reported. The aim of this study is to measure expression of 80+ oncoproteins in EAC using multiplexed mass spectrometry to elucidate expression of currently approved-drug targets and explore promising new targets for drug development. Methods: After Institutional Review Board approval (Mayo Clinic and KUMC), EAC patients whose tumors were resected via esophagectomy before chemotherapy and/or radiation were identified. Normal esophageal mucosa samples with no history of EAC were also retrieved for analysis. Tissue sections were microdissected to exclude stroma from adenocarcinoma cells. Isolated EAC cells were solubilized for mass spectrometry-based quantitation of more than 80 clinically relevant tumor markers. Results: 55 EAC tissues were analyzed. HER2, PD-L1 and EGFR were overexpressed only in 16.3%, 0%, and 0% of patients, respectively. New oncoproteins #2 and #6 were noted to have high (7,634.0 and 27,222.6 attomoles/ug) and consistent (98.1% and 94.5%) overexpression in EAC samples. Expression of HER2, oncoproteins #2 and #6 were significantly higher in EAC compared to normal esophageal mucosa. There was no statistical difference in the expression of PD-L1 and EGFR between EAC and normal samples. Conclusions: Mass spectrometry revealed a very low prevalence of target oncoproteins in EAC for currently used drugs. Our study potentially reveals alternate markers which are near universally present at high levels and should be further explored for targeted treatment.[Table: see text]

249 Background: Since 1975, Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) incidence has increased more than any other cancer (̃700%). Pre-malignant metaplastic tissue, or Barrett's Esophagus (BE), is the only known precursor for EAC. Periodic histological assessment of endoscopic biopsy along dysplasia-carcinoma sequence is used to assess progression risk. Current surveillance protocols have clinical limitations as 80% of patients still present with stage II-IV EAC. The aim of this study is to compare novel proteomic expression patterns to distinguish stable BE patients from those who developed EAC using the STLA101 assay. Methods: After Institutional Review Board approval patients with BE/GERD were identified. Two cohorts were selected: progressors (progressed to EAC at subsequent interval of 0.5-3 years) and non–progressors (̃10 yrs of f/u surveillance without progression along dysplasia/carcinoma path). 24 normal esophageal mucosa samples with no h/o of BE were also retrieved for baseline expression levels. Tissue sections were microdissected to isolate pure BE cells from surrounding stromal cells. BE cells underwent a multi-step process where tissue was heated and digested to produce a liquid biopsy for mass spec. Isotopically labeled control peptides representing the STLA101 panel were spiked in with digested tissue samples to quantify all of the markers simultaneously using a Triple-quad mass spectrometer. Results: A total of 95 tissues were analyzed. 29 BE biopsies progressed to EAC within a mean of 380 days while the remaining 28 BE and 14 GERD specimens did not progress over a 10-yr period. All 8 biomarkers were expressed at a higher level in BE tissue that progressed to cancer when compared to BE/GERD tissue that remained stable over 10 years. The assay had a 100% technical success rate as no samples yielded “non-detectable” data points. Conclusions: The differential overexpression of the STLA101 panel on progressive and non-progressive BE tissues demonstrates the clinical utility of STLA101 as a predictive biomarker panel for early detection of esophageal carcinogenesis. Non-progressive BE tissues were similar to normal mucosa, therefore, patients whose BE tissue samples resemble this profile may receive a reduced screening cadence. On the other hand, patients with overexpression of the STLA101 panel may be eligible to receive more frequent screening or therapeutic intervention.

206 Background: Human serum metabolome profiles have been analyzed to explore the molecular changes that occur with aging. We hypothesized that deep metabolic profiling of sera with different ages would allow the identification of distinct metabolic chronologic patterns as a normal biological baseline to study personal aging. We further hypothesized that metabolic assessment of this chronologic deviation, resulting from advanced precancerous lesion (APL) and stage I/II/III CRC, from the normal reference baseline, would be instrumental for prognosis of relapse revealing underlying pathophysiology. Methods: A cohort of normal (n=3,616, training; n=1,170, testing), 631 advanced adenoma, 1,019 stage I, 404 stage II and 417 stage III serum samples were assembled. Innovative global LCMS metabolomic production were applied to deep profile these subjects. Identification of the age-associated molecular patterns in normal subjects, modeled with an elastic net algorithm, established the reference baseline to mirror a metabolic clock. CRC associated deviation from the precise chronologically paced metabolic patterns was quantified to associate the clinical endpoints of relapse, OSF and PFS, and to identify the tightly associated metabolic pathways. Results: We observed that for those CRCs, the predicted metabolic age can differ from the chronological age with consistent variations, resulting “older” or “younger” metabolic age subgroup in reference to the chronological age. Significant disruptions from the normal baseline were observed in CRCs patients, and consistent stage specific patterns were observed. Outlier, “Older” or “younger” metabolic age subgroup, CRC patients were found with significant future relapse enrichment. Predictive models were derived to case find the patients at risk of future relapse at the CRC diagnosis timepoint. Conclusions: Deviations from the meticulously timed metabolic aging patterns may provide utility to allow prognosis of future clinical endpoints of relapse and overall survival. Close examination of the underlying metabolic pathways, associated with CRC stage specific metabolic patterns, disrupting the baseline ageotypes, not only may improve the sensitivity and specificity of prognostic tests of CRC relapse, but also shed new insights into CRC therapeutics.