Abstract PD6-4: ESR1 gene fusions implicated in endocrine therapy resistance of ER+ breast cancer

Background. We recently identified an in-frame ESR1 translocation in a tumor and PDX pair from a patient with endocrine therapy resistant advanced disease. The fusion gene preserved the N-terminal 365aa of ESR1 containing the intact activation function 1 (AF1), DNA-binding domain (DBD) and hinge, followed by the C-terminal transactivation domain of YAP1. The ESR1-365>YAP1 fusion drove estrogen-independent and anti-estrogen-resistant tumor cell growth (Cell Reports 4:1116, 2013). We therefore sought to further investigate the role of ESR1 fusion genes in breast cancer. Methods. 711 cases from TCGA, 82 ER+ cases from neoadjuvant endocrine therapy trials and 25 ER+ systemic relapse samples were screened for fusion genes using RNAseq. Fusion genes involving ESR1 were subsequently assayed for estrogen response element (ERE)-mediated transcriptional activity and ability to drive estradiol independent breast cancer cell growth. Results. Multiple ESR1 fusions were identified in mostly luminal B cancers. ESR1 fusions resulted most frequently from rearrangements involving another gene on Chromosome (Chr) 6 but also fusions with genes on other chromosomes. The fusions involving partners on Chr6 that retained an intact N terminal AF1 and DNA binding domain (DBD) of ESR1 (≥1-253aa) included an Out-of-Frame (OF) fusion event with CCDC170 (a gene immediately centromeric to ESR1), POLH (in-frame or IF), AKAP12 (IF), PCMT1 (OF), SYNE1 (OF) and GPR126 (OF). Also identified were inter-chromosomal translocations involving Chr12p-NOP2 (IF) and ChrX-PCDH11X (IF) and Chr7q-AKR1D1 (OF). The ESR1 fusions with transcriptional potential (because of a retained DNA binding domain) included variable 5’ ESR1 exons that preserved 253aa, 365aa, 412aa or 458aa of ESR1 sequence: in all cases disrupting ligand binding though loss of C terminal sequence. The effect of the IF and OF 3’ sequences on the transcriptional activity of the relevant ESR1 fragment was highly variable. The most transcriptionally active fusion (more active than the relevant ESR1 fragment alone) was the ESR1-365>YAP1 as well as ESR1-365>PCDH11X and ESR1-253>CCDC170. This is remarkable since PCDH11X is not considered a transcription factor and the CCDC170 sequence was OF – in both cases suggesting the activity of the fusion was due to "neomorphic" properties. Two fusions, NOP2 and POLH were inactive in the ERE reporter assay, yet both stimulated estradiol independent growth. In these cases we suggest that the ESR1 locus can function as a "promoter trap" which allows the identification of genes with previously unknown functions in endocrine therapy resistance. Conclusions: In luminal-type breast cancer the ESR1 gene was fused to multiple 3’ partners with remarkably heterogeneous functions. The two most transcriptionally active, ESR1-365>YAP1 and ESR1-365>PCDH11X, were both identified in endocrine therapy refractory advanced disease – suggesting a role in fatal disease progression. Citation Format: Jieya Shao, Jin Zhang, Robert J Crowder, Rodrigo Goncalves, Chanpheng Phommaly, Breast AWG and Network, Charles M Perou, Christopher A Maher, E Aubrey Thompson, Matthew J Ellis. ESR1 gene fusions implicated in endocrine therapy resistance of ER+ breast cancer [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 PD6-4.