Molecular profiling of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and target-based therapeutic matching in an Asian tertiary phase I oncology unit

3561 Background: Somatic profiling of MBC has highlighted actionable mutations and driven trials of matched targeted therapy (tx). Previous phase I studies have reported improved outcomes following matched therapies with tumour molecular profiles. Here, we review next generation sequencing (NGS) and treatment outcomes of Asian MBC patients (pts) in the phase I unit of a tertiary centre. Methods: Pts with MBC referred to a phase I unit underwent NGS (n = 152). Tumour tissue was sequenced via the amplicon based Ion Ampliseq Cancer (IAC) v2 (50 genes) platform from 2014-2017 prior to institutional change to Foundation Medicine 1 (FM1) (324 genes) 2017-2019. Patients were counselled on findings and enrolled onto matched therapeutic trials where available. Results: NGS was successfully performed in 107 pts (IAC 46%, FM1 54%) of which tumour subtypes include hormone receptor positive 63%, triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) 28% and Her2 positive 19%. Median lines of prior tx for MBC was 4 (range 0-12). 89% had prior chemotherapy (CT), 57% prior endocrine therapy (ET). 72/107 (67%) sequenced patients had further treatment and 18 (25%) were matched to tx based on NGS findings (15 clinical trial, 3 off trial). Matching rates on both NGS platforms were similar (IAC 22% vs FM1 28%). Mutated pathways with potential matched tx included PIK3CA/AKT/PTEN (52%), DNA damage response (DRR) (15%), and FGFR (11%) pathways. PIK3 mutations were seen in 43% and associated with higher number of metastatic sites (p = 0.03); most prevalent aberrations were PIK3CA H1047R (41%) and PIK3CA E542K (13%). Matched cases were more heavily pretreated (mean lines of prior tx 5.3 matched vs 3.7, unmatched p = 0.05), and showed a median progression free survival (mPFS) of 24 weeks [w] and clinical benefit rate (complete/partial response or stable disease ≥ 12 weeks) of 53% on matched tx. Comparison by NGS platform showed improved mPFS for matched vs unmatched pts sequenced on FM1 vs IAC (FM1: 26 vs 19w, HR = 0.76 [95% CI: 0.3-1.9]; IAC: 8 vs 12w; HR = 1.21 [95% CI: 0.5-2.8]). Interestingly, 1 pt with SMARCB mutation, reportedly associated with the FGFR pathway, had a PFS of 70w on tx with a pan-FGFR inhibitor after progressing on 3 prior lines of tx (ET and CT). Conclusions: Molecular profiling of MBC in a phase I unit led to matched tx in 25% of cases. Matched pts showed encouraging mPFS with a suggestion of benefit in those matched after sequencing on a broader gene panel (FM1).