Search

AKT S473 distribution based on ER, HER2 expression measured by IHC in for primary and metastatic lesions included in the validation set.

Supplementary material legend

Concordance between PIK3CA, AKT, and PTEN mutation status and AKT (S473) and p70S6 (T389) activation.

Purpose: Little is known about the molecular signatures associated with specific metastatic sites in breast cancer. Using comprehensive multi-omic molecular profiling, we assessed whether alterations or activation of the PI3K–AKT–mTOR pathway is associated with specific sites of breast cancer metastasis.Experimental Design: Next-generation sequencing–based whole-exome sequencing was coupled with reverse-phase protein microarray (RPPA) functional signaling network analysis to explore the PI3K–AKT–mTOR axis in 32 pretreated breast cancer metastases. RPPA-based signaling data were further validated in an independent cohort of 154 metastatic lesions from breast cancer and 101 unmatched primary breast tumors. The proportion of cases with PI3K–AKT–mTOR genomic alterations or signaling network activation were compared between hepatic and nonhepatic lesions.Results: PIK3CA mutation and activation of AKT (S473) and p70S6K (T389) were detected more frequently among liver metastases than nonhepatic lesions (P < 0.01, P = 0.056, and P = 0.053, respectively). However, PIK3CA mutations alone were insufficient in predicting protein activation (P = 0.32 and P = 0.19 for activated AKT and p70S6K, respectively). RPPA analysis of an independent cohort of 154 tumors confirmed the relationship between pathway activation and hepatic metastasis [AKT (S473), mTOR (S2448), and 4EBP1 (S65); P < 0.01, P = 0.02, and P = 0.01, respectively]. Similar results were also seen between liver metastases and primary breast tumors [AKT (S473) P < 0.01, mTOR (S2448) P < 0.01, 4EBP1 (S65) P = 0.01]. This signature was lost when primary tumors were compared with all metastatic sites combined.Conclusions: Breast cancer patients with liver metastasis may represent a molecularly homogenized cohort with increased incidence of PIK3CA mutations and activation of the PI3K–AKT–mTOR signaling network. Clin Cancer Res; 23(16); 4919–28. ©2017 AACR.

This prospective phase II clinical trial (Side Out 2) explored the clinical benefits of treatment selection informed by multi‐omic molecular profiling (MoMP) in refractory metastatic breast cancers (MBCs). Core needle biopsies were collected from 32 patients with MBC at trial enrollment. Patients had received an average of 3.94 previous lines of treatment in the metastatic setting before enrollment in this study. Samples underwent MoMP, including exome sequencing, RNA sequencing (RNA‐Seq), immunohistochemistry, and quantitative protein pathway activation mapping by Reverse Phase Protein Microarray (RPPA). Clinical benefit was assessed using the previously published growth modulation index (GMI) under the hypothesis that MoMP‐selected therapy would warrant further investigation for GMI ≥ 1.3 in ≥ 35% of the patients. Of the 32 patients enrolled, 29 received treatment based on their MoMP and 25 met the follow‐up criteria established by the trial protocol. Molecular information was delivered to the tumor board in a median time frame of 14 days (11–22 days), and targetable alterations for commercially available agents were found in 23/25 patients (92%). Of the 25 patients, 14 (56%) reached GMI ≥ 1.3. A high level of DNA topoisomerase I (TOPO1) led to the selection of irinotecan‐based treatments in 48% (12/25) of the patients. A pooled analysis suggested clinical benefit in patients with high TOPO1 expression receiving irinotecan‐based regimens (GMI ≥ 1.3 in 66.7% of cases). These results confirmed previous observations that MoMP increases the frequency of identifiable actionable alterations (92% of patients). The MoMP proposed allows the identification of biomarkers that are frequently expressed in MBCs and the evaluation of their role as predictors of response to commercially available agents. Lastly, this study confirmed the role of MoMP for informing treatment selection in refractory MBC patients: more than half of the enrolled patients reached a GMI ≥ 1.3 even after multiple lines of previous therapies for metastatic disease., This prospective trial assessed the role of multi‐omic molecular profiling in informing treatment selection for metastatic breast cancer patients. Molecular profiles were collected in 14 business days and targetable alterations for commercial agents were identified in 92% of patients; 56% of patients reached a growth modulation index ≥ 1.3 after multiple lines of previous therapies. This work confirms the unique role for multi‐omic molecular profiling in guiding treatment selection for metastatic patients.

Background: While genomic alterations are central players in tumor progression, proteins are the targets for precision therapy. The degree by which “actionable” genomic alterations translate into activated/altered proteins and pathway is still under investigation. Using a multi-OMIC approach from the SideOut 2 metastatic breast cancer (MBC) trial, this study explored the concordance between selected “actionable” genomic alterations and protein expression/activation. Methods: Snap frozen biopsies from 29 MBC patients enrolled in a prospective phase II trial were used for this analysis. Exome WES and RNASeq data was processed using an in-house developed pipeline and identified amplification of CCND1 (6/29), FGFR1 (4/29), and FGF 3, 4, 5, and 19 (4/29) as some of most frequent “actionable” genomic alterations in our MBC cohort. Signaling analysis of the 29 cases was performed using Reverse Phase Protein Microarray coupled with Laser Capture Microdissection. Protein expression/phosphorylation was measured in a continuous scale and classified based on quartile distribution. Concordance between CCND1 amplification and Cyclin D1 expression, along with the activation of FOXM1 T600 and Rb S780, was explored. Amplification of the FGFR1 locus or its ligands was correlated with the level of activation/phosphorylation of FGFR1 Y653/654. Results: While Cyclin D1 protein expression was greater than the population mean for 4/6 (67%) patients with CCND1 amplification, only 2/6 (33%) patients with CCND1 amplification had Cyclin D1 level within the top quartile of the population (n=29). FOXM1 T600 activation was independent from CCND1 amplification, with high levels of FOXM1 T600 predominantly in the CCND1 wild-type population. Only 1/6 (17%) patients with CCND1 amplification had FOXM1 T600 level similar to the top quartile of the population while a second patient was above the population median. Activation of Rb S780 was above the population median, but below the top quartile, in 2/6 (33%) CCND1 amplified patients. Similarly, none of the patients with activation of FGFR Y653/654 equal to the top quartile harbored an FGFR1 amplification. Only 1/4 (25%) patients carrying an FGFR1 amplification had an activation of FGFR Y653/654 above the population median. Similarly, 1/4 (25%) patients with FGF ligand amplification showed FGFR Y653/654 level within the top quartile while three patients had FGFR Y653/654 activation below the population median. No significant results were found between proteomic (below/above the median) and genomic characteristics by Fisher test (p>0.05). Conclusion: Molecular genotyping of “actionable” cancer targets alone may be insufficient in predicting whether the actual drug target protein is expressed and/or activated in any given patient's tumor. Although these results need further validation, the combination of genomic and proteomic data may represent a more informative approach for identifying real molecular drivers of individual lesions as well as “actionable” protein/phosphoprotein targets in the absence of genomic events. Multi-OMIC approaches may lead to more effective stratification in precision medicine trials. Citation Format: Pierobon M, Wong S, Reeded A, Anthony S, Robert N, Northfelt DW, Jahanzeb M, Vocila L, Wulfkuhle J, Dunetz B, Aldrich J, Byron S, Craig D, Liotta L, Carpten J, Petricoin EF. A multi-OMIC analysis to explore the impact of “actionable” genomic alterations on protein pathway activation: Clinical implication for precision medicine in metastatic breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-07-09.

Background: The identification of organ-specific targetable signatures may help design more effective treatment for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We took a multi-OMIC approach to assess whether the AKT-mTOR pathway is globally activated during metastatic progression or whether it represents an organ-specific target. Methods: Snap frozen biopsies from 25 MBC patients enrolled in a prospective phase II trial were used. Sites of metastasis were classified as liver (n=8) and others (n=17), the latter including cutaneous, lung, lymph nodes, and intra-abdominal lesions. Signaling analysis of the 25 cases was performed using Reverse Phase Protein Microarray (RPPA) coupled with Laser Capture Microdissection. Activation of the AKT-mTOR pathway was quantified as phosphorylation of AKT (S473) and the mTOR target p70S6 (T389). Matched exome (WES) and RNASeq data were available for 17 of 25 patients, five with liver metastases. Sequencing data was processed using an in-house developed pipeline to identify somatic events including coding mutations, copy number alterations, gene fusions, and differential expression. Activation of the AKT-mTOR pathway and sequencing data were compared between hepatic and non-hepatic lesions using an integrated RPPA and genomic approach. Results: Among liver metastases, AKT was activated in 4 of the 8 (50.0%) patients, while 6 of the 8 cases (75.0%) showed activation of p70S6. Sequencing data revealed mutation of PIK3CA in 4 of the 5 liver metastases (80.0%). Three of the PIK3CA mutated specimens with catalytic domain mutations (codons 1023 and 147) demonstrated co-activation of AKT and p70S6, while the fourth case, containing a helical domain mutation (E542K), had activation of p70S6 only. The PIK3CA wild-type liver metastasis demonstrated low activation of AKT and p70S6. For non-hepatic metastases AKT was activated in 2 of the 17 cases (11.8%) and p70S6 in 5 of the 17 patients (29.4%). Discussion: Although these results need further validation, activation of the AKT-mTOR pathway appears to be a hepatic specific signature in MBC and could be used for the selection of targeted agents for hepatic lesions. Citation Format: Pierobon M, Wong S, Reeder A, Anthony SP, Robert NJ, Northfelt DW, Jahanzeb M, Vocila L, Wulfkuhle J, Dunetz B, Aldrich J, Byron S, Craig D, Liotta L, Petricoin EF, Carpten J. The AKT-mTOR pathway as a potential organ-specific drug target signature of hepatic metastases from breast cancer. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-05-21.

Background: The development of distant metastases is the strongest prognostic factor associated with cancer mortality. Customization of treatment based on molecular profiling of a patient’s primary tumor has yielded promising results and has opened a new paradigm for treating patients with advanced disease. Nevertheless profiling the primary tumor may not reflect the actionable molecular drivers of the metastatic lesions. In the last few years a large number of genomic and proteomic studies have demonstrated that at the molecular level metastatic lesions significantly differ from matched primary tumors. The impact of metastasis site organ microenvironments on breast cancer primary tumors has been only partially explored. Since most targeted therapies work by modulating aberrantly-activated protein kinase signaling, the aim of this study was to utilize reverse phase protein arrays (RPPA) to explore whether metastatic lesions derived from different patients, but invading the same host target organ showed similarities in their signaling architecture and presented with organ-specific targetable signatures. Methods: Snap frozen material collected from 14 metastatic breast cancer patients enrolled in a prospective phase II trial ("Side Out II") were used for this analysis. Sites of metastasis were: liver (n=7), skin/chest wall (n=4), and lung (n=3). All samples were subjected to Laser Capture Microdissection (LCM) and RPPA to measure the activation/phosphorylation levels of 12 FDA approved drug targets and linked substrates. Results: Among the 7 patients with liver metastases, p70S6K, c-Abl, ERK 1/2 were highly phosphorylated in 5 cases (71.4%), ErbB2/HER2 in 4 cases (57.1%), and AKT in 3 cases (42.8%). On the contrary, of the 4 patients with skin/chest wall lesions 3 showed high activation of ErbB2/HER2, ErbB3/HER3, and ERK 1/2 (75.0%) and 2 of EGFR (50.0%). Of note, none of the skin/chest wall lesions showed activation of AKT and only 1 case presented with activated p70S6K (25.0%). Lung metastasis showed an overall low activation of all 12 analytes measured. Discussion: Although this data is based on a relatively small number of samples and needs further validation, our initial analysis revealed potentially important trends that could have an impact in the prioritization and selection of targeted agents for metastatic breast cancer trials. We found that the distribution of the 12 FDA approved drug targets and downstream substrates varies between different metastatic sites. Thus, the emergent hypothesis from this work is that breast cancer patients with liver metastases may be more susceptible to AKT-mTOR directed targeted therapeutics and patients with skin/chest wall metastasis may benefit from therapies that target EGFR and/or downstream ERK signaling. Citation Format: Mariaelena Pierobon, Stephen P Anthony, K Alex Reeder, Nicholas J Robert, Donald W Northfelt, Mohammad Jahanzeb, Linda Vocila, Julia D Wulfkuhle, Bryant Dunetz, Lance A Liotta, Emanuel F Petricoin. Pathway activation mapping of metastatic breast cancer identifies potential organ-specific signatures: Implications for patient stratification to targeted treatment [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-07-23.

Purpose: Little is known about the molecular signatures associated with specific metastatic sites in breast cancer. Using comprehensive multi-omic molecular profiling, we assessed whether alterations or activation of the PI3K–AKT–mTOR pathway is associated with specific sites of breast cancer metastasis. Experimental Design: Next-generation sequencing–based whole-exome sequencing was coupled with reverse-phase protein microarray (RPPA) functional signaling network analysis to explore the PI3K–AKT–mTOR axis in 32 pretreated breast cancer metastases. RPPA-based signaling data were further validated in an independent cohort of 154 metastatic lesions from breast cancer and 101 unmatched primary breast tumors. The proportion of cases with PI3K–AKT–mTOR genomic alterations or signaling network activation were compared between hepatic and nonhepatic lesions. Results: PIK3CA mutation and activation of AKT (S473) and p70S6K (T389) were detected more frequently among liver metastases than nonhepatic lesions (P < 0.01, P = 0.056, and P = 0.053, respectively). However, PIK3CA mutations alone were insufficient in predicting protein activation (P = 0.32 and P = 0.19 for activated AKT and p70S6K, respectively). RPPA analysis of an independent cohort of 154 tumors confirmed the relationship between pathway activation and hepatic metastasis [AKT (S473), mTOR (S2448), and 4EBP1 (S65); P < 0.01, P = 0.02, and P = 0.01, respectively]. Similar results were also seen between liver metastases and primary breast tumors [AKT (S473) P < 0.01, mTOR (S2448) P < 0.01, 4EBP1 (S65) P = 0.01]. This signature was lost when primary tumors were compared with all metastatic sites combined. Conclusions: Breast cancer patients with liver metastasis may represent a molecularly homogenized cohort with increased incidence of PIK3CA mutations and activation of the PI3K–AKT–mTOR signaling network. Clin Cancer Res; 23(16); 4919–28. ©2017 AACR.

Background: Although the efficacy of different immunotherapeutic agents varies greatly across tumor types, little is known about the role of different metastatic tumor microenvironments in modulating the expression of immune-checkpoints like PD-L1. Using metastatic breast cancer as a model, this work explored whether metastatic lesions derived from different patients, but colonizing the same host target organ, showed organ-specific immune signatures. Methods: Snap frozen metastatic lesions collected from 30 breast cancer patients enrolled in a prospective phase II multi-omic precision medicine clinical trial (“Side-Out II”) were used for this analysis. Sites of metastasis were: liver (LI) (n=10), skin/chest wall (SC) (n=10), and other lesions (OL) (n=10) [including lymph nodes (LN) (n=4), lung (LU) (n=3), and intra-abdominal lesions (IA) (n=3)]. Pure tumor epithelia were isolated from each specimen via Laser Capture Microdissection (LCM). PD-L1 expression (Antibody Clone E1L3N) was quantitatively measured using the Reverse Phase Protein Microarray (RPPA), a high-throughput, multiplex immunoassay that provides operator-independent quantitative data starting from a small amount of biological material. Proportion of patients with PD-L1 expression above the median and the 75th percentile of the population was compared across metastatic sites. Results: PD-L1 expression had a >5 fold dynamic range across breast cancer-derived metastatic lesions with different distribution across metastatic sites. Specifically, PD-L1 expression of 6/10 LIs, 5/10 OLs (including 2 LU and 3 LN positive lesions), and 4/10 SC metastases was greater than the population median of all metastases combined. LI metastases were the most represented group above the 75th percentile of the population (4/10), followed by OS (2/10) (including 1 LU and 1 LN positive lesions), and SC (1/10). Of the 15 lesions above the population median, 6 were LI (40%), 5 were OS (33%), and 4 were SC (27%); of the 7 metastases above the 75th percentile, 4 were LI (57%), 2 were OS (29%), and 1 was SC (14%). Conclusions: The LCM-RPPA workflow can capture PD-L1 protein expression on a continuous quantitative scale and provide a broader understanding of the dynamic range of expression. Our data suggest that organ specific microenvironments in which metastatic lesions develop may strongly influence overall PD-L1 tumor cell expression. If different metastatic host organs can modulate PD-L1 expression, location of the metastatic lesion should be kept in consideration when selecting patients that are candidates for immunotherapy. Such hypotheses should be further validated in prospective clinical trial where quantitative PD-L1 expression of different metastatic lesions is evaluated along with response to targeted immuno-oncology compounds. Citation Format: Mariaelena Pierobon, K Alex Hodge, Elisa Baldelli, Steven Anthony, Nicholas J. Robert, Donald W. Northfelt, Mohammad J. Jahanzeb, Linda Vocila, Lance A. Liotta, Bryant Dunetz, Emanuel F. Petricoin. PD-L1 expression differs across cancer metastatic sites from breast tumors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 3129.

Purpose: To describe a phase II study design to evaluate the activity of novel anti-cancer agents that focuses on molecular pathogenesis rather than tumor histology. Methods: We propose an enrichment design that enrolls patients across histologies expressing target X and incorporates randomized discontinuation of drug Y after an initial treatment period to evaluate for potential cystostatic activity. Results: We are currently evaluating the activity of lapatinib in patients with HER-2 amplified solid tumors using the target-specific, histology-independent, randomized discontinuation design. Patients receive treatment with lapatinib for an initial 12-week period. After restaging, patients with disease progression are removed from study, patients achieving an objective response continue treatment, and patients with stable disease are randomized to continue lapatinib versus initiate treatment with placebo. The primary endpoints are to evaluate the objective response rate during the initial treatment period and to evaluate the proportion of patients progression-free 12 weeks post-randomization. Conclusion: The target-specific, histology-independent, randomized discontinuation design is an attractive alternative to the traditional phase II design for the development of “targeted” therapeutics.

TPS2621 Background: TKM-080301 is a lipid nanoparticle formulation of a small interfering RNA (siRNA) directed against PLK1, a serine/threonine kinase that regulates multiple critical aspects of cell cycle progression and mitosis. Anti-tumor activity, RNA interference and pharmacodynamic effects of PLK1 inhibition have been conclusively demonstrated in preclinical models. Demonstration of pharmacodynamic effects of PLK1 inhibition in patient biopsy samples is an exploratory objective of this first-in-human study. Methods: TKME080301 is being evaluated in an open-label, non-randomized, dose-escalation study in patients with advanced solid tumors or lymphoma. Sequential cohorts of 3 to 6 patients receive TKME080301 as a 30-minute intravenous infusion on Days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Treatment can continue until disease progression, based on overall clinical benefit. Tumor response is determined according to RECIST criteria. Primary study objectives include determination of safety, maximum tolerated dose and dose limiting toxicities. Secondary objectives include characterization of pharmacokinetics and the preliminary assessment of anti-tumor activity. Five cohorts have been enrolled and a tentative Phase 2 dose has been identified. An expansion cohort of 10 patients began enrolling in February, 2013. The focus of the expansion cohort will be to collect additional safety and pharmacokinetic data at the tentative Phase 2 dose, as well as pharmacodynamic data from mandatory biopsy samples. Pre- and post-dose biopsy samples will be evaluated for potential evidence of PLK1 inhibition using 5’ RACE (rapid amplification of cDNA ends) polymerase chain reaction (to identify the predicted PLK1 mRNA cleavage product), histology (to assess for the presence of aberrant mitotic figures) and immunohistochemistry. An update on enrollment and pharmacodynamic evaluations will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT01262235.

TPS11123 Background: The objective of this prospective pilot study was to determine if treatment selected by molecular profiling (MP) of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) tumors at time of disease progression provides greater clinical benefit than empiric treatment selection. Methods: Eligible pts had MBC, ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy, and > 6 wks - < 6 months time to progression on last treatment prior to study entry. Fresh core biopsy samples were taken from the metastatic site for MP. Analysis by IHC, FISH, DNA microarray and reverse phase protein microarray (RPMA) a quantitative protein pathway activation mapping technique using laser capture micro dissected tumor cells was done, with results in ≤14 days reviewed by a Treatment Selection Committee. The primary objective was to compare the progression-free survival (PFS) using a MP selected treatment regimen to the preceding PFS. Clinical benefit for the pt is defined by PFS ratio (PFS on MP selected therapy/PFS on prior therapy) is ≥ 1.3, (JCO,28:4877-83:2010). N= 25 was determined (exact single-stage design for phase II studies, type I error rate of 5% [one-sided], power of 90%). MP selected therapy would warrant further investigation if ≥ 35% of the pts demonstrate a PFS ratio of ≥ 1.3. Results: Three U.S. sites enrolled 25 evaluable pts who were treated based on MP results. Pts were heavily pretreated with 4 -11 prior therapies (median 7.24). Ten pts (40%) met or exceeded the PFS ratio of 1.3. The most common targets used in drug treatment selection were TOPO1, TS, ER/PR, TOP2A, HER2. Sixty percent of pts’ samples had activation of drug targets determined by RPMA in 3 major clusters: pan-HER-AKT; EGFR/SRC/ERK/mTOR; IGFR/RAF/MEK/PLK1. Days on MP selected treatments range from 9 - 816+. 3 pts continue on treatment for 199, 254 and 816 days. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the feasibility of a highly multiplexed genomic and proteomic MP study for treatment selection in a timely fashion. Patient-specific target driven treatment selection based on MP of a metastatic lesion provided clinical benefit for 10 of 25 heavily pretreated MBC pts. Thus, this approach merits further investigation in future studies. Funded by The Side-Out Foundation. Clinical trial information: NCT01074814.

Introduction: It is well known that the development of distant metastasis is the strongest prognostic factor associated with cancer mortality. Recent genomic and proteomic studies have demonstrated that the molecular profile of the metastatic lesions significantly differs from the primary tumor. For this reason, to improve response to therapy the identification of new drug targets needs to be based on the molecular profile of the metastatic lesions rather than the primary tumor. Since most targeted therapies work by modulating hyperactivated protein kinase signaling, the aim of this study was to utilize reverse phase protein arrays (RPPA) to quantitatively measure the drug target signaling architecture to identify new therapeutic options for Stage IV breast cancer patients based on the molecular profile of the metastatic lesion. Methods: Snap frozen material collected from 25 metastatic breast cancer patients enrolled in a prospective phase II trial (“Side Out” 1) were used for this study. Sites of metastasis were: liver (n=12), skin (n=5), lymph nodes (n=5), breast (n=2), and pelvis (n=1). All samples were subjected to Laser Capture Microdissection (LCM) and RPPA whereby the activation/phosphorylation level of 55 drug targets and linked substrates for FDA cleared/experimental therapies were measured. Results: Unsupervised hieratical clustering analysis revealed distinct patient subgroups driven largely by pathway activation more than by site of metastasis. Based on the activation level of the drug targets and the downstream effectors, three major clusters were identified. Each cluster appeared to be driven by a specific subset of drug targets: a) pan-HER family members, b) EGFR/SRC/ERK/mTOR, and c) IGFR/RAF/MEK/PLK1. Conclusion: This is the first study evaluating the activation status of FDA approved/experimental drug targets and downstream effectors in a relatively large number of breast cancer metastatic lesions. This type of approach provides a unique opportunity for identifying new drug targets for this group of patients and provides initial insights on which pathways should be considered in the delivery of targeted therapy to this group of patients. 1. A Pilot Study Utilizing Molecular Profiling by IHC, FISH, DNA Microarray, and Reverse Phase Protein Microarray (RPMA) of Patients’ Tumors to Find Potential Targets and Select Treatments for Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer, sponsored by the Side Out Foundation Citation Format: Mariaelena Pierobon, Kimberly A. Reeder, Gayle Jameson, Nicholas Robert, Stephen P. Anthony, Jasgit Sachdev, Linda Vocila, Julia Wulfkuhle, Elisa Baldelli, Lance Liotta, Emanuel F. Petricoin. Protein pathway activation mapping analysis of metastatic breast cancer reveals potential new targets for personalized therapy. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 104th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2013 Apr 6-10; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2013;73(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 2043. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2013-2043

Background: Polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1) is a serine/threonine kinase that regulates multiple critical aspects of cell progression. PLK1 is over-expressed in many human tumor types and its over-expression is a negative prognostic indicator of patient outcome in a variety of cancers. TKM-080301 is a lipid nanoparticle formulation of a small interfering RNA (siRNA) directed against PLK1 that has been shown to effect highly selective reductions in PLK1 mRNA in vitro and in tumor xenograft models in mice. Methods: A phase I multi-center, open-label, non-randomized, dose-escalation study of TKM-080301 is ongoing in patients with advanced solid tumors or lymphoma. Sequential cohorts of 3 to 6 patients receive TKM-080301 as a 30-minute IV infusion on Days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Primary objectives include determination of safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose limiting toxicities (DLTs). Secondary objectives include characterization of pharmacokinetics (PK) and preliminary assessment of anti-tumor activity and pharmacodynamic effects. Pre-and post-dose biopsy samples are being collected from patients treated after DLT has been established. Results: Twenty-three (23) patients, receiving a cumulative total of 128 doses, have been treated with TKM-080301 at doses ranging from 0.15 to 0.9 mg/kg/week. The most common drug-related adverse events have been mild-to-moderate infusion related reactions with delayed onset, pyrexia, chills, nausea, vomiting, and fatigue. Mild, transient increases in certain cytokines (e.g., IL-6, IL-8, MCP-1) have been observed at dose levels ≤0.75 mg/kg/week and generally correlated with the timing of delayed infusion reactions. DLTs were observed at 0.9 mg/kg/week and included hypoxia/dyspnea in one patient (with a previous history of asthma) and thrombocytopenia in another patient. The dose level was subsequently reduced to 0.75 mg/kg/week. Pharmacokinetic parameters determined after the first dose in Cycles 1 and 2 demonstrated dose proportional Cmax and AUC and no obvious accumulation. Two patients have received TKM-080301 for at least 6 months (6 cycles) with no evidence of cumulative toxicity, including one patient with stable disease (colon) and one patient with a durable confirmed partial response (carcinoid tumor) who has received 8+ cycles of treatment. Conclusions: Preliminary results from this first-in-human trial indicate TKM-080301 was generally well-tolerated by the majority of patients. Preliminary antitumor efficacy has been observed, supporting PLK1 as a therapeutic target. As two DLTs were observed at the dose of 0.9 mg/kg/week, patient accrual is continuing at the 0.75 mg/kg/week dose level. Citation Format: Ramesh K. Ramanathan, Solomon I. Hamburg, Mitesh J. Borad, Mahesh Seetharam, Madappa N. Kundranda, Peter Lee, Paul Fredlund, Mark Gilbert, Cathy Mast, Sean C. Semple, Adam D. Judge, Brynne Crowell, Linda Vocila, Ian MacLachlan, Donald W. Northfelt. A phase I dose escalation study of TKM-080301, a RNAi therapeutic directed against PLK1, in patients with advanced solid tumors. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 104th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2013 Apr 6-10; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2013;73(8 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-289. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2013-LB-289

3541 Background: The current paradigm of histology-specific drug development may not be optimal in the era of targeted therapeutics. We sought to explore the activity of lapatinib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor of HER2, with a trial design focused on the target rather than on tumor-type. Methods: Patients (pts) with HER2-amplified treatment-refractory metastatic gastro- esophageal (G/E), bladder (B), ovarian (O), or uterine (U) tumors were enrolled into a double-blinded randomized discontinuation study of lapatinib 1500 mg PO daily (malignancies selected based on reported frequencies of HER2 amplification). The planned sample size was 250 HER2+ pts, with the goal of then randomizing 100 pts with SD at week (wk) 12 to either lapatinib or placebo until progressive disease (PD). Pts who responded at wk 12 (CR or PR) continued on lapatinib; those who progressed were discontinued from study. Primary objectives were response rate at 12 wks and percentage of pts who remain progression free at 24 wks. Secondary objectives were duration of response, progression free survival (PFS) after randomization, and determination of the incidence of HER2 amplification in multiple tumor types. Futility analyses were preplanned to ensure feasibility of screening and of randomization (i.e. a sufficient rate of non- progression at 12 wks). Results: A total of 145 pts were screened (G/E=47, B=35, O=58, U=5); 42 were HER2-amplified (G/E=16, B=13, O=13, U=0) and 32 (G/E=13, B=9, O=10) were enrolled. At wk 12, 1 (3%) patient had a CR, 10 (31%) had SD, 19 (59%) had PD, and 2 (6%) were unknown. Median time to progression during open-label lapatinib was 78 days, 95% CI (42, 92). Only 7 pts with SD underwent randomization. Two pts with esophageal cancer remain on study; one (CR at wk 12) remains a CR at wk 60 and the other (SD at wk 12) remains with SD at wk 36. Low response rate coupled with slow screening and enrollment led to early study closure. Conclusions: Basing trial eligibility on a target, versus histologic classification, is challenging. While HER2 amplifications appear to be prevalent in select non-breast tumors, lapatinib monotherapy in refractory disease is associated with a low level of objective responses. [Table: see text]

2562 Background: The usual clinical development plan for a new agent (NA) includes a phase I monotherapy trial. However, because many new agents are eventually developed as part of a combination, additional phase I trials assessing the new agent in combination with a standard agent are usually performed (usually as individual phase Ib studies). Our hypothesis was that within a single protocol, several combination phase I trials could be conducted simultaneously. Methods: The design of the protocol is (assuming the new agent is synergistic with an anthracycline, a tubulin interactive agent, an antimetabolite, an angiogenesis inhibitor or an antibody to EGFR): patients with advanced cancer are treated with the combination deemed most likely to be of help-with a choice of a) anthracycline + NA; b) tubulin interactive + NA; c) antimetabolite + NA; d) angiogenesis inhibitor + NA; e) antibody to EGFR + NA. The standard agent is started at full dose with 3 patients placed at 1/3 full dose of NA, 3 patients at 2/3 dose of NA, and 3–6 patients at full dose of the NA in the combination. Results: Our experience with the complete phase Ib trial has found several advantages over conducting separate phase I trials. The advantages include: (a) a very rapid follow-up on preclinical data in one study; (b) a saving of time and expense in the start up; (c) accrual is rapid because many patients in a practice are likely to be eligible (e.g. the standard agent is the standard of care); (d) patients are often less pretreated; (e) the trial generates information for more informed selection of follow-up randomized phase II or III trials. Conclusions: Utilizing a Complete phase Ib trial design is feasible. Our initial experience has suggested that this approach is safe and highly efficient with several potential advantages over multiple sequential combination phase Ib studies. No significant financial relationships to disclose.