Genomic alterations in DNA repair and chromatin remodeling genes in estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer patients with exceptional responses to capecitabine

We analyzed the genomic and phosphoproteomic profiles of breast cancer tissue obtained from six patients with estrogen receptor (ER)‐positive, HER2‐negative metastatic breast cancer who had highly durable (≥5 years) and, in some cases, ongoing clinical responses with capecitabine. Formalin‐fixed, paraffin‐embedded tissue samples from patients' primary (n = 4) or metastatic (n = 2) breast cancers were utilized for targeted next‐generation sequencing and reversed phase protein microarray. Two patients received capecitabine monotherapy. Four patients received capecitabine in combination with paclitaxel; three of these continued single‐agent capecitabine after stopping paclitaxel. Capecitabine was discontinued for progressive disease after a mean of 66 months in four patients (range 54–86 months), and two patients remain on therapy, having received capecitabine for >91 months and >122 months, respectively. Three patients' cancers (50%) had likely functional alterations in DNA repair and chromatin remodeling genes, while three other patients' cancers had variants of unknown significance in these pathways. Mutations in PIK3CA, amplifications of FGFR1 or ZNF703, or phosphorylation of HER family receptors and their downstream proteins did not preclude exceptional responses to capecitabine. None of the patients' tumors harbored TP53 or PTEN mutations. Four of the patients had breast cancer tissue available for PTEN immunohistochemistry, and all four patients' cancers were positive for PTEN. These surprising findings in a group of phenotypically similar patients with ER‐positive, endocrine therapy‐pretreated, HER2‐negative metastases, are supported by preclinical data showing that sensitivity to 5‐fluorouracil is enhanced by deficiencies in chromatin remodeling and homologous recombination genes. Our findings suggest that mutations that inactivate homologous recombination and/or chromatin remodeling genes within ER‐positive, HER2‐negative breast cancers may predict for highly durable responses to capecitabine.

[1]  J. Desterro,et al.  SETD2 is required for DNA double-strand break repair and activation of the p53-mediated checkpoint , 2014, eLife.

[2]  M. Meyerson,et al.  Oncogenic and sorafenib-sensitive ARAF mutations in lung adenocarcinoma. , 2014, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[3]  S. Millis,et al.  Abstract PD4-1: Comparison of mutations and protein expression in potentially actionable targets in 5500 triple negative vs. non-triple negative breast cancers , 2013 .

[4]  Alex M. Fichtenholtz,et al.  Development and validation of a clinical cancer genomic profiling test based on massively parallel DNA sequencing , 2013, Nature Biotechnology.

[5]  P. Fasching,et al.  Phase III trial of sunitinib in combination with capecitabine versus capecitabine monotherapy for the treatment of patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer. , 2013, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[6]  A. Escargueil,et al.  ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling and histone acetyltransferases in 5-FU cytotoxicity in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. , 2013, Genetics and molecular research : GMR.

[7]  Benjamin E. Gross,et al.  Integrative Analysis of Complex Cancer Genomics and Clinical Profiles Using the cBioPortal , 2013, Science Signaling.

[8]  C. Sander,et al.  Genome Sequencing Identifies a Basis for Everolimus Sensitivity , 2012, Science.

[9]  Steven J. M. Jones,et al.  Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumors , 2012, Nature.

[10]  A. Børresen-Dale,et al.  The landscape of cancer genes and mutational processes in breast cancer , 2012, Nature.

[11]  Benjamin E. Gross,et al.  The cBio cancer genomics portal: an open platform for exploring multidimensional cancer genomics data. , 2012, Cancer discovery.

[12]  D. Mavroudis,et al.  A multicenter randomized phase III trial of vinorelbine/gemcitabine doublet versus capecitabine monotherapy in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated women with metastatic breast cancer. , 2012 .

[13]  V. Georgoulias,et al.  A multicenter randomized phase III trial of vinorelbine/gemcitabine doublet versus capecitabine monotherapy in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated women with metastatic breast cancer. , 2012, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[14]  N. Robert,et al.  Capecitabine monotherapy: review of studies in first-line HER-2-negative metastatic breast cancer. , 2012, The oncologist.

[15]  Doron Lipson,et al.  Identification of new ALK and RET gene fusions from colorectal and lung cancer biopsies , 2012, Nature Medicine.

[16]  F. Bertucci,et al.  Capecitabine after anthracycline and taxane exposure in HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer patients: response, survival and prognostic factors. , 2010, Anticancer research.

[17]  A. Escargueil,et al.  DNA repair pathways involved in repair of lesions induced by 5-fluorouracil and its active metabolite FdUMP. , 2010, Biochemical pharmacology.

[18]  P Kelly Marcom,et al.  Randomized phase III trial of capecitabine compared with bevacizumab plus capecitabine in patients with previously treated metastatic breast cancer. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[19]  S. Culine,et al.  Multicentre, phase II study evaluating capecitabine monotherapy in patients with anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer. , 2004, European journal of cancer.

[20]  A. Buzdar,et al.  Multicenter phase II study of capecitabine in paclitaxel-refractory metastatic breast cancer. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[21]  A. Winship Interest. , 1893 .

[22]  Steven J. M. Jones,et al.  Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours , 2013 .